Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation ?cleaner?

[robert winfield via EV]

 California energy 
mixhttps://flowcharts.llnl.gov/content/assets/images/charts/Energy/Energy_2014_United-States_CA.png

USA energy mix
https://flowcharts.llnl.gov/content/assets/images/charts/Energy/Energy_2017_United-States.png

On Wednesday, December 26, 2018, 4:34:03 PM EST, Darryl McMahon via EV 
 wrote:  
 
 We don't have to guess at the California electricity mix.

https://www.energy.ca.gov/almanac/electricity_data/total_system_power.html

(rounding to nearest percent for simplicity)

29% from renewables other than large hydro

15% from large hydro

9% from nuclear (not renewable, but reasonably low emissions impact from 
an existing plant - final disposition of spent fuel still to be solved)

4% from coal

34% from natural gas (fossil)

9% unidentified

That's what shows up on the grid.  It does not include those producing 
off-grid, or generating for in-house use (e.g. household PV used behind 
the meter).

Greener grid means greener EV use.

As for using hydrogen as a transportation fuel for light vehicles in 
typical missions (commuting, errand running, occasional longer trips), I 
looked into this early in this century, and kept some track since. 
Things have not changed much on the technology side in the intervening 
period for hydrogen vehicles, other than using bigger storage at higher 
pressure.

Darryl McMahon
Author, award-winning book: The Emperor's New Hydrogen Economy (2006)
(on digest mode, so don't expect quick responses)

On 12/26/2018 4:09 PM, ev-requ...@lists.evdl.org wrote:
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:53:47 + (UTC)
> From: Lawrence Rhodes
> To:ev@lists.evdl.org
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation ?cleaner?
> Message-ID:<1956029850.2785592.1545857627...@mail.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> California uses mostly hydro at night.? There are natural gas plants for high 
> demand.? I think that is how it works or should work.? Lawrence Rhodes

-- 
Darryl McMahon
Freelance Project Manager (sustainable systems)
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

  
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20181228/e41b1d77/attachment.html>
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation ?cleaner?

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

bon sources (natural gas 
> > and diesel generation in remote communities).  Still, we aren't finished 
> > yet.  Storage projects are continuing to be built to displace the need for 
> > the gas peaker plants.  Old small hydro plants are being upgraded.  Remote 
> > communities are being connected to the grid to eliminate the need for 
> > diesel generation.
> > 
> > We have also made incredible progress in making battery electric vehicles, 
> > especially the battery technology, sufficient for most driving needs, 
> > reliable and affordable.  There is excitement in that field and no 
> > indication the cost and storage capacity trends are going to change anytime 
> > soon.  We are also making substantial strides in provisioning a charging 
> > network throughout the industrialized and industrializing world to support 
> > away-from-base charging, to extend the utility of battery EVs in every day 
> > missions.  And we're working on how to continue in those directions while 
> > supporting, not threatening, electrical utilities and grid reliability.
> > 
> > As for my sources on hydrogen technology, they include hydrogen proponents, 
> > scientists, engineers, journals in multiple fields, and various news media. 
> >  The hydrogen skeptics don't bother poking me.  And for clarity, regarding 
> > hydrogen, I did not say nothing has changed, I said things have not changed 
> > much on the technology side other than increasing on-board storage.
> > 
> > Darryl McMahon (driving electric since 1978)
> > 
> > 
> >> On 12/27/2018 11:02 AM, ev-requ...@lists.evdl.org wrote:
> >> Message: 2
> >> Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:32:43 -0800
> >> From: Mark Abramowitz
> >> To:dar...@econogics.com,Electric Vehicle Discussion List
> >>
> >> Subject: Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation ?cleaner?
> >> Message-ID:<31d037dd-aa34-425f-8e6e-b1587e84e...@enviropolicy.com>
> >> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8
> >> We?ve made incredible progress over just the last few years in greening 
> >> the grid.
> >> By 2045, it should be 100% renewable. By 2030, transportation hydrogen 
> >> should be 100% renewable.
> >> (BTW, if you think that nothing else has changed in hydrogen technology in 
> >> the last several years, there is something wrong with your sources)
> >> - Mark
> >> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
> > 
> > -- 
> >Darryl McMahon
> > Freelance Project Manager (sustainable systems)
> > ___
> > UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> > http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> > Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 
> > 
> 
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20181228/bbc3d33a/attachment.html>
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation ?cleaner?

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

very day 
> missions.  And we're working on how to continue in those directions while 
> supporting, not threatening, electrical utilities and grid reliability.
> 
> As for my sources on hydrogen technology, they include hydrogen proponents, 
> scientists, engineers, journals in multiple fields, and various news media.  
> The hydrogen skeptics don't bother poking me.  And for clarity, regarding 
> hydrogen, I did not say nothing has changed, I said things have not changed 
> much on the technology side other than increasing on-board storage.
> 
> Darryl McMahon (driving electric since 1978)
> 
> 
>> On 12/27/2018 11:02 AM, ev-requ...@lists.evdl.org wrote:
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:32:43 -0800
>> From: Mark Abramowitz
>> To:dar...@econogics.com, Electric Vehicle Discussion List
>>
>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation ?cleaner?
>> Message-ID:<31d037dd-aa34-425f-8e6e-b1587e84e...@enviropolicy.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8
>> We?ve made incredible progress over just the last few years in greening the 
>> grid.
>> By 2045, it should be 100% renewable. By 2030, transportation hydrogen 
>> should be 100% renewable.
>> (BTW, if you think that nothing else has changed in hydrogen technology in 
>> the last several years, there is something wrong with your sources)
>> - Mark
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
> 
> -- 
> Darryl McMahon
> Freelance Project Manager (sustainable systems)
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation ?cleaner?

[Darryl McMahon via EV]

Hello Mark and all,

as expected, I'm tardy with a response, and I see the discussion has 
moved on, and as already noted, shows why hydrogen is typically OT for 
this list.


I'm not prepared to debate the merits of hydrogen as a fuel or energy 
store here.  I had those debates from the late 1990s to 2006.  My stance 
now is you have to read my book to continue the discussion, because the 
issues with hydrogen are many, and you have to solve all of them to have 
a valid contender.


To your specific points in your last post.

We have made incredible advances in greening the grid, and I have been 
an active participant in that.  I charge EVs primarily in Ontario and 
Quebec.


Quebec has zero coal, zero natural gas generation and a trivial amount 
of diesel generation for communities not connected to the North American 
continental grid.  The bulk of their generation comes from big hydro, 
although small hydro, wind and PV are growing from a small foothold.


All in all, over 99% electricity generation from renewables.  Not by 
2045.  Today.


Ontario has made significant strides in the past decade, in no small 
part due to the efforts of the Ontario Clean Air Alliance.  Ontario 
generation has zero coal, 4% natural gas (shrinking), a serious amount 
of large hydro, and growing amounts of wind and PV.


We're not done yet.  We are seriously over-invested in nuclear and 
continuing down that wrong path.  Our new government is in favour of 
dinosaur generation sources, and cancelled over 750 signed renewables 
contracts in their first month in office (breach of contract lawsuits to 
follow) and our EV purchase incentive program.  Shutting down all 
coal-fired generation in Ontario is the single largest greenhouse gas 
emissions reduction project in North America to date.


All in all, less than 4% generation from fossil carbon sources (natural 
gas and diesel generation in remote communities).  Still, we aren't 
finished yet.  Storage projects are continuing to be built to displace 
the need for the gas peaker plants.  Old small hydro plants are being 
upgraded.  Remote communities are being connected to the grid to 
eliminate the need for diesel generation.


We have also made incredible progress in making battery electric 
vehicles, especially the battery technology, sufficient for most driving 
needs, reliable and affordable.  There is excitement in that field and 
no indication the cost and storage capacity trends are going to change 
anytime soon.  We are also making substantial strides in provisioning a 
charging network throughout the industrialized and industrializing world 
to support away-from-base charging, to extend the utility of battery EVs 
in every day missions.  And we're working on how to continue in those 
directions while supporting, not threatening, electrical utilities and 
grid reliability.


As for my sources on hydrogen technology, they include hydrogen 
proponents, scientists, engineers, journals in multiple fields, and 
various news media.  The hydrogen skeptics don't bother poking me.  And 
for clarity, regarding hydrogen, I did not say nothing has changed, I 
said things have not changed much on the technology side other than 
increasing on-board storage.


Darryl McMahon (driving electric since 1978)


On 12/27/2018 11:02 AM, ev-requ...@lists.evdl.org wrote:

Message: 2
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:32:43 -0800
From: Mark Abramowitz
To:dar...@econogics.com, Electric Vehicle Discussion List

Subject: Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation ?cleaner?
Message-ID:<31d037dd-aa34-425f-8e6e-b1587e84e...@enviropolicy.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;   charset=utf-8

We?ve made incredible progress over just the last few years in greening the 
grid.

By 2045, it should be 100% renewable. By 2030, transportation hydrogen should 
be 100% renewable.

(BTW, if you think that nothing else has changed in hydrogen technology in the 
last several years, there is something wrong with your sources)

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone


--
Darryl McMahon
Freelance Project Manager (sustainable systems)
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation ?cleaner?

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

??

What are you responding to?  My comment about greening the grid?  

Be clear? (And chill out).

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Dec 27, 2018, at 1:08 AM, Peter Eckhoff via EV  wrote:
> 
> But what about **your** sources???  You were asked for your references.
> Your spiel is well and good if the economic efficiencies are there.  Who
> has made breakthroughs and where can they read the same things you are
> reading?
> 
> I made a list of the hydrogen economy weaknesses years ago and would have
> no problems switching economically if the issues have been solved.
> 
> On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 1:12 AM Mark Abramowitz via EV 
> wrote:
> 
>> We’ve made incredible progress over just the last few years in greening
>> the grid.
>> 
>> By 2045, it should be 100% renewable. By 2030, transportation hydrogen
>> should be 100% renewable.
>> 
>> (BTW, if you think that nothing else has changed in hydrogen technology in
>> the last several years, there is something wrong with your sources)
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>> 
>>> On Dec 26, 2018, at 1:34 PM, Darryl McMahon via EV 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> We don't have to guess at the California electricity mix.
>>> 
>>> 
>> https://www.energy.ca.gov/almanac/electricity_data/total_system_power.html
>>> 
>>> (rounding to nearest percent for simplicity)
>>> 
>>> 29% from renewables other than large hydro
>>> 
>>> 15% from large hydro
>>> 
>>> 9% from nuclear (not renewable, but reasonably low emissions impact from
>> an existing plant - final disposition of spent fuel still to be solved)
>>> 
>>> 4% from coal
>>> 
>>> 34% from natural gas (fossil)
>>> 
>>> 9% unidentified
>>> 
>>> That's what shows up on the grid.  It does not include those producing
>> off-grid, or generating for in-house use (e.g. household PV used behind the
>> meter).
>>> 
>>> Greener grid means greener EV use.
>>> 
>>> As for using hydrogen as a transportation fuel for light vehicles in
>> typical missions (commuting, errand running, occasional longer trips), I
>> looked into this early in this century, and kept some track since. Things
>> have not changed much on the technology side in the intervening period for
>> hydrogen vehicles, other than using bigger storage at higher pressure.
>>> 
>>> Darryl McMahon
>>> Author, award-winning book: The Emperor's New Hydrogen Economy (2006)
>>> (on digest mode, so don't expect quick responses)
>>> 
>>>> On 12/26/2018 4:09 PM, ev-requ...@lists.evdl.org wrote:
>>>> Message: 6
>>>> Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:53:47 + (UTC)
>>>> From: Lawrence Rhodes
>>>> To:ev@lists.evdl.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation ?cleaner?
>>>> Message-ID:<1956029850.2785592.1545857627...@mail.yahoo.com>
>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>>> California uses mostly hydro at night.? There are natural gas plants
>> for high demand.? I think that is how it works or should work.? Lawrence
>> Rhodes
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Darryl McMahon
>>> Freelance Project Manager (sustainable systems)
>>> ___
>>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>>> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>>> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
>>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
>> 
>> 
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20181227/b87fcbb5/attachment.html>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 
> 

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation ?cleaner?

[Peter Eckhoff via EV]

But what about **your** sources???  You were asked for your references.
Your spiel is well and good if the economic efficiencies are there.  Who
has made breakthroughs and where can they read the same things you are
reading?

I made a list of the hydrogen economy weaknesses years ago and would have
no problems switching economically if the issues have been solved.

On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 1:12 AM Mark Abramowitz via EV 
wrote:

> We’ve made incredible progress over just the last few years in greening
> the grid.
>
> By 2045, it should be 100% renewable. By 2030, transportation hydrogen
> should be 100% renewable.
>
> (BTW, if you think that nothing else has changed in hydrogen technology in
> the last several years, there is something wrong with your sources)
>
> - Mark
>
> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>
> > On Dec 26, 2018, at 1:34 PM, Darryl McMahon via EV 
> wrote:
> >
> > We don't have to guess at the California electricity mix.
> >
> >
> https://www.energy.ca.gov/almanac/electricity_data/total_system_power.html
> >
> > (rounding to nearest percent for simplicity)
> >
> > 29% from renewables other than large hydro
> >
> > 15% from large hydro
> >
> > 9% from nuclear (not renewable, but reasonably low emissions impact from
> an existing plant - final disposition of spent fuel still to be solved)
> >
> > 4% from coal
> >
> > 34% from natural gas (fossil)
> >
> > 9% unidentified
> >
> > That's what shows up on the grid.  It does not include those producing
> off-grid, or generating for in-house use (e.g. household PV used behind the
> meter).
> >
> > Greener grid means greener EV use.
> >
> > As for using hydrogen as a transportation fuel for light vehicles in
> typical missions (commuting, errand running, occasional longer trips), I
> looked into this early in this century, and kept some track since. Things
> have not changed much on the technology side in the intervening period for
> hydrogen vehicles, other than using bigger storage at higher pressure.
> >
> > Darryl McMahon
> > Author, award-winning book: The Emperor's New Hydrogen Economy (2006)
> > (on digest mode, so don't expect quick responses)
> >
> >> On 12/26/2018 4:09 PM, ev-requ...@lists.evdl.org wrote:
> >> Message: 6
> >> Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:53:47 + (UTC)
> >> From: Lawrence Rhodes
> >> To:ev@lists.evdl.org
> >> Subject: Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation ?cleaner?
> >> Message-ID:<1956029850.2785592.1545857627...@mail.yahoo.com>
> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> >> California uses mostly hydro at night.? There are natural gas plants
> for high demand.? I think that is how it works or should work.? Lawrence
> Rhodes
> >
> > --
> > Darryl McMahon
> > Freelance Project Manager (sustainable systems)
> > ___
> > UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> > http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> > Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> >
>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20181227/b87fcbb5/attachment.html>
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation ?cleaner?

[Cor van de Water via EV]

I hear a lot of hand-waving and little data in claims about lots of change in 
hydrogen technology.

For the topic of making transportation hydrogen renewable – nobody is 
contesting that for the handful of cars that actually drive on Hydrogen, it is 
simple to switch small scale to use full renewable. BTW, it is still an 
*intent* to move to full renewable, I have not seen *commitment* for the 
investment…

The big issue and you seem intent to continue to avoid that, is that switching 
to Hydrogen will greatly *increase* the energy consumption compared to driving 
on electricity from the grid directly using batteries. By increasing the energy 
consumption (approximately 3-fold) you also increase any associated emissions. 
Since Renewable Energy is still a finite resource, consuming 3 times as much 
means that more non-renewable needs to be produced, unless you can find a way 
to uniquely capture RE that would otherwise not be utilized – which is 
sometimes possible in case of over-production of RE.

Still, the production of Hydrogen as energy carrier is about the silliest 
possible solution. I have seen arguments for non-scientific people where the 
claim is that H2 is the future because it is the fastest, lightest fuel 
available. That is an interesting way to state the biggest hurdle for the use 
of Hydrogen, the fact that it carries the least amount of energy, because it is 
the lightest and therefor the most voluminous of all possible fuels.

But I understand the desire of the oil companies to maintain their markets and 
models of fuel distribution, especially if the tax payers will be footing the 
bill.

I have not heard much new arguments that make a case for needing H2, except 
that a fast refill is possible *if* there were enough filling stations and the 
intent of the industry to make all H2 from full renewable sources.
Since every H2 car on the road uses the energy of 3 similar size BEV, I am not 
excited about a possible prospect of H2 in the future.
I think we already are living in the future with the current new crop of BEV.
Only that does not fit the business model of a lot of powerful people who stand 
to lose money with BEV going mainstream.
That is why we see a lot of negative press about BEV and attempts to thwart 
their progress.
That is nothing new, it has happened for decades.

Mark, I know you are concerned about emissions (if I remember correctly, that 
was your stated reason to be interested in Renewable Energy and fuel cell 
vehicles) but promoting a technology that uses 3 times the source energy of the 
alternative is not a good way to achieve lower emissions, you may even cause 
higher emissions from the increase in energy consumption – despite the desire 
to manufacture H2 using all RE.
It is better to help find ways to fast charge BEV and *reduce* source energy 
consumption, so that the available RE can power 3 times as many vehicles.
At least, that is what *I* chose to do.
Regards,
Cor.

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: Mark Abramowitz via EV
Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2018 10:12 PM
To: dar...@econogics.com; Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Cc: Mark Abramowitz
Subject: Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation ?cleaner?

We’ve made incredible progress over just the last few years in greening the 
grid. 

By 2045, it should be 100% renewable. By 2030, transportation hydrogen should 
be 100% renewable.

(BTW, if you think that nothing else has changed in hydrogen technology in the 
last several years, there is something wrong with your sources)

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Dec 26, 2018, at 1:34 PM, Darryl McMahon via EV  wrote:
> 
> We don't have to guess at the California electricity mix.
> 
> https://www.energy.ca.gov/almanac/electricity_data/total_system_power.html
> 
> (rounding to nearest percent for simplicity)
> 
> 29% from renewables other than large hydro
> 
> 15% from large hydro
> 
> 9% from nuclear (not renewable, but reasonably low emissions impact from an 
> existing plant - final disposition of spent fuel still to be solved)
> 
> 4% from coal
> 
> 34% from natural gas (fossil)
> 
> 9% unidentified
> 
> That's what shows up on the grid.  It does not include those producing 
> off-grid, or generating for in-house use (e.g. household PV used behind the 
> meter).
> 
> Greener grid means greener EV use.
> 
> As for using hydrogen as a transportation fuel for light vehicles in typical 
> missions (commuting, errand running, occasional longer trips), I looked into 
> this early in this century, and kept some track since. Things have not 
> changed much on the technology side in the intervening period for hydrogen 
> vehicles, other than using bigger storage at higher pressure.
> 
> Darryl McMahon
> Author, award-winning book: The Emperor's New Hydrogen Economy (2006)
> (on digest mode, so don't expect quick responses)
&g

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation ?cleaner?

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

We’ve made incredible progress over just the last few years in greening the 
grid. 

By 2045, it should be 100% renewable. By 2030, transportation hydrogen should 
be 100% renewable.

(BTW, if you think that nothing else has changed in hydrogen technology in the 
last several years, there is something wrong with your sources)

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Dec 26, 2018, at 1:34 PM, Darryl McMahon via EV  wrote:
> 
> We don't have to guess at the California electricity mix.
> 
> https://www.energy.ca.gov/almanac/electricity_data/total_system_power.html
> 
> (rounding to nearest percent for simplicity)
> 
> 29% from renewables other than large hydro
> 
> 15% from large hydro
> 
> 9% from nuclear (not renewable, but reasonably low emissions impact from an 
> existing plant - final disposition of spent fuel still to be solved)
> 
> 4% from coal
> 
> 34% from natural gas (fossil)
> 
> 9% unidentified
> 
> That's what shows up on the grid.  It does not include those producing 
> off-grid, or generating for in-house use (e.g. household PV used behind the 
> meter).
> 
> Greener grid means greener EV use.
> 
> As for using hydrogen as a transportation fuel for light vehicles in typical 
> missions (commuting, errand running, occasional longer trips), I looked into 
> this early in this century, and kept some track since. Things have not 
> changed much on the technology side in the intervening period for hydrogen 
> vehicles, other than using bigger storage at higher pressure.
> 
> Darryl McMahon
> Author, award-winning book: The Emperor's New Hydrogen Economy (2006)
> (on digest mode, so don't expect quick responses)
> 
>> On 12/26/2018 4:09 PM, ev-requ...@lists.evdl.org wrote:
>> Message: 6
>> Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:53:47 +0000 (UTC)
>> From: Lawrence Rhodes
>> To:ev@lists.evdl.org
>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation ?cleaner?
>> Message-ID:<1956029850.2785592.1545857627...@mail.yahoo.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>> California uses mostly hydro at night.? There are natural gas plants for 
>> high demand.? I think that is how it works or should work.? Lawrence Rhodes
> 
> -- 
> Darryl McMahon
> Freelance Project Manager (sustainable systems)
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation ?cleaner?

[paul dove via EV]

“Except for the upper stage of a rocket, hydrogen makes no sense,” Elon Musk, 
the parent of the battery-powered Roadster and Model S said in an e-mail 
interview to ScienceFriday.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 26, 2018, at 3:38 PM, Lawrence Rhodes via EV  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> Remember how the BEV industry was just 10 years ago, 20 years ago, and 30 
>> years and more ago.
> 
>> Back then, while pushing for years for a ZEV mandate, I heard many of the 
>> same arguments used by the auto and oil companies >about BEVs as I have 
>> heard for several years about hydrogen.
> 
> - Mark
> People smarter than me did the math and it proves that BEV will work very 
> well.  Then the cars were built and it works well.  People smarter than me 
> have also done the math on hydrogen and proven that it does work but at a 
> rate that is more expensive in all respects not to mention metal 
> embrittlement allowing hydrogen to escape and possibly explode. So many 
> problems including hydrogen escape.  Since hydrogen is the smallest particle 
> there is a natural loss.  The hydrogen dead end is so obvious it is troubling 
> that there is a lobby.  Simply hydrogen is a way that the energy stream might 
> be privatized and monetized in favor of the owner not the user as electric 
> is.  Electricity: you can make it yourself, plug in yourself store it 
> yourself.  Hydrogen is financially exorbitant for personal use.  All the same 
> problems that you have with the gasoline economy you have with hydrogen.  
> Why?  Oh yes...range anxiety. Barn muck also works as a fuel source...do you 
> see a horseshit lobby?  Actually there is. So find your niche and stay there. 
>  See if it works but stop trying to take over BEV.  It works.  It will win.  
> Stop the hydrogen diversion. Wishes are not reality. Solar cars are probably 
> the future but so far few believe me. Lawrence Rhodes 
> 
> 
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> 
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation ?cleaner?

[EVDL Administrator via EV]

I won't dismiss H2 quite as hard and fast as Lawrence just did, but I think 
he's mostly on the right track.  

Twenty years ago I thought that, despite its appreciably greater complexity 
and cost, potential safety issues, and lower efficiency, H2 might be the 
"magic bullet" for the range that vehicle buyers demand.  (We know that they 
seldom need that much range, but they think so.  Unfortunately, perception, 
not reality, determines consumer behavior.)

I think that's all moot now.  Battery capacity has improved and costs have 
fallen so rapidly that I don't really see a need for EV H2 energy storage 
any more.

But Lawrence is right -- while *I* don't see a need, and he doesn't. the 
suits who've gotten rich selling fuel to motorists DO.  The billions of 
dollars they already have will never be enough, so they desperately need to 
somehow keep us dependent on their filling stations.  

If they were sufficiently forward-looking, they could buy into electric 
utilities to maintain some profit from EVs.  However, they just HATE change. 
And the idea that EV owners can in effect collect transport fuel from their 
rooftops must scare the pants off of these tycoons.  

David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EVDL Administrator

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
Note: mail sent to "evpost" and "etpost" addresses will not 
reach me.  To send a private message, please obtain my 
email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation ?cleaner?

[Darryl McMahon via EV]

We don't have to guess at the California electricity mix.

https://www.energy.ca.gov/almanac/electricity_data/total_system_power.html

(rounding to nearest percent for simplicity)

29% from renewables other than large hydro

15% from large hydro

9% from nuclear (not renewable, but reasonably low emissions impact from 
an existing plant - final disposition of spent fuel still to be solved)


4% from coal

34% from natural gas (fossil)

9% unidentified

That's what shows up on the grid.  It does not include those producing 
off-grid, or generating for in-house use (e.g. household PV used behind 
the meter).


Greener grid means greener EV use.

As for using hydrogen as a transportation fuel for light vehicles in 
typical missions (commuting, errand running, occasional longer trips), I 
looked into this early in this century, and kept some track since. 
Things have not changed much on the technology side in the intervening 
period for hydrogen vehicles, other than using bigger storage at higher 
pressure.


Darryl McMahon
Author, award-winning book: The Emperor's New Hydrogen Economy (2006)
(on digest mode, so don't expect quick responses)

On 12/26/2018 4:09 PM, ev-requ...@lists.evdl.org wrote:

Message: 6
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2018 20:53:47 + (UTC)
From: Lawrence Rhodes
To:ev@lists.evdl.org
Subject: Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation ?cleaner?
Message-ID:<1956029850.2785592.1545857627...@mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

California uses mostly hydro at night.? There are natural gas plants for high 
demand.? I think that is how it works or should work.? Lawrence Rhodes


--
Darryl McMahon
Freelance Project Manager (sustainable systems)
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation ?cleaner?

[Lawrence Rhodes via EV]

California uses mostly hydro at night.  There are natural gas plants for high 
demand.  I think that is how it works or should work.  Lawrence Rhodes  
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation ?cleaner?

[Lawrence Rhodes via EV]

 


>Remember how the BEV industry was just 10 years ago, 20 years ago, and 30 
>years and more ago.

>Back then, while pushing for years for a ZEV mandate, I heard many of the same 
>arguments used by the auto and oil companies >about BEVs as I have heard for 
>several years about hydrogen.

- Mark
People smarter than me did the math and it proves that BEV will work very well. 
 Then the cars were built and it works well.  People smarter than me have also 
done the math on hydrogen and proven that it does work but at a rate that is 
more expensive in all respects not to mention metal embrittlement allowing 
hydrogen to escape and possibly explode. So many problems including hydrogen 
escape.  Since hydrogen is the smallest particle there is a natural loss.  The 
hydrogen dead end is so obvious it is troubling that there is a lobby.  Simply 
hydrogen is a way that the energy stream might be privatized and monetized in 
favor of the owner not the user as electric is.  Electricity: you can make it 
yourself, plug in yourself store it yourself.  Hydrogen is financially 
exorbitant for personal use.  All the same problems that you have with the 
gasoline economy you have with hydrogen.  Why?  Oh yes...range anxiety. Barn 
muck also works as a fuel source...do you see a horseshit lobby?  Actually 
there is. So find your niche and stay there.  See if it works but stop trying 
to take over BEV.  It works.  It will win.  Stop the hydrogen diversion. Wishes 
are not reality. Solar cars are probably the future but so far few believe me. 
Lawrence Rhodes 

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

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[EVDL Administrator via EV]

On 24 Dec 2018 at 11:44, Mark Abramowitz via EV wrote:

> oeThen at night, you may be charging on on "fossil" power; but it's just
> getting back the power you "loaned" the grid by day.
> 
> ITMm not so sure about this. We do store some PV for use later, but where we
> canTMt, that resource just gets curtailed (or we pay Arizona to take it)

I don't think that's what he meant.  I may be wrong, but I think that what 
he's getting at is that the energy your PV system generates during the day 
(but you can't use then) goes into the grid, and powers someone else's load 
at that time.  That represents fuel that the power plant doesn't have to 
burn until later that night, when YOU plug in to charge your EV.  

David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EVDL Administrator

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
Note: mail sent to "evpost" and "etpost" addresses will not 
reach me.  To send a private message, please obtain my 
email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

“Then at night, you may be charging on on "fossil" power; but it's just getting 
back the power you "loaned" the grid by day.”

I’m not so sure about this. We do store some PV for use later, but where we 
can’t, that resource just gets curtailed (or we pay Arizona to take it).

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Dec 24, 2018, at 11:21 AM, Lee Hart  wrote:
> 
> From: Mark Abramowitz via EV 
>> See the subject of the thread for the bottom line answer, though things are 
>> never as simple as a one-liner.
> 
> That's for sure! It's not a simple problem; so there are no simple answers. 
> If anyone who has a simple answer, it's probably wrong. :-)
> 
>> For someone who wanted to jump into the deep data, something I learned 
>> recently is that for those charging from the grid at night, the energy they 
>> are using is virtually all non-renewable (fossil). And I’m told that most of 
>> it is from fracked natural gas.(this is all California perspective - other 
>> areas use more coal on the grid)
> 
> I can believe it. Power at night is going to come from the base load plants, 
> which are likely to be coal, hydro, or nuclear (or gas in CA). So where your 
> EV charging power comes from will depend on where you live.
> 
> California isn't the center of the world; but it probably has the highest 
> concentration of EVs (at least in the US). It's ironic that much of the 
> state's EV charging power is coming from fossil fuels.
> 
>> For those of you that are thinking that faced with this information, battery 
>> EV are not worth pushing any more (haha), I’ll say that you are still wrong. 
>> BOTH are still important, and needed.
> 
> That's for sure! Electrons aren't traceable, and generation has to exactly 
> match consumption at every second.
> 
> But you can have PV panels generate power during the day. You don't need it; 
> so it gets used by someone else on the grid. It reduces the amount of fossil 
> fuel that gets used by day. Then at night, you may be charging on on "fossil" 
> power; but it's just getting back the power you "loaned" the grid by day.
> 
> To me, the fundamental problem is out infatuation with "monoculture" 
> solutions. Government and big business want one-size-fits-all solutions. But 
> everyone is different. We our situations are *different*, so we need to be 
> able to choose from different solutions that meet our individual needs. There 
> is going to be a place for hydrogen, batteries, wind, solar, and even fossil 
> fuels for a long time to come. It's just the balance between them that needs 
> to change.
> 
> --
> Excellence does not require perfection. -- Henry James
> --
> Lee A. Hart http://www.sunrise-ev.com
> 

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[Lee Hart via EV]

From: Mark Abramowitz via EV 
>See the subject of the thread for the bottom line answer, though things are 
>never as simple as a one-liner.

That's for sure! It's not a simple problem; so there are no simple answers. If 
anyone who has a simple answer, it's probably wrong. :-)

>For someone who wanted to jump into the deep data, something I learned 
>recently is that for those charging from the grid at night, the energy they 
>are using is virtually all non-renewable (fossil). And I’m told that most of 
>it is from fracked natural gas.(this is all California perspective - other 
>areas use more coal on the grid)

I can believe it. Power at night is going to come from the base load plants, 
which are likely to be coal, hydro, or nuclear (or gas in CA). So where your EV 
charging power comes from will depend on where you live.

California isn't the center of the world; but it probably has the highest 
concentration of EVs (at least in the US). It's ironic that much of the state's 
EV charging power is coming from fossil fuels.

>For those of you that are thinking that faced with this information, battery 
>EV are not worth pushing any more (haha), I’ll say that you are still wrong. 
>BOTH are still important, and needed.

That's for sure! Electrons aren't traceable, and generation has to exactly 
match consumption at every second.

But you can have PV panels generate power during the day. You don't need it; so 
it gets used by someone else on the grid. It reduces the amount of fossil fuel 
that gets used by day. Then at night, you may be charging on on "fossil" power; 
but it's just getting back the power you "loaned" the grid by day.

To me, the fundamental problem is out infatuation with "monoculture" solutions. 
Government and big business want one-size-fits-all solutions. But everyone is 
different. We our situations are *different*, so we need to be able to choose 
from different solutions that meet our individual needs. There is going to be a 
place for hydrogen, batteries, wind, solar, and even fossil fuels for a long 
time to come. It's just the balance between them that needs to change.

--
Excellence does not require perfection. -- Henry James
--
Lee A. Hart http://www.sunrise-ev.com
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[Peri Hartman via EV]

I must have blinked or maybe I'm blind. Could you please repeat your 
citation for cases where hydrogen generation (from non fossil fuels) 
currently is cleaner than grid electricity.

Peri

-- Original Message --
From: "Mark Abramowitz" 
To: "Peri Hartman" ; "Electric Vehicle Discussion 
List" 

Sent: 23-Dec-18 6:49:49 PM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” 
(GHG emissions) than the grid



See the subject of the thread for the bottom line answer, though things are 
never as simple as a one-liner. But I gave you my answer, and you didn’t want 
to accept it.

I also gave you the reasons why, but you wanted sources, so there’s the table.

I really don’t use this table - it was just to give you the info you wanted. I 
could pick and choose data pieces, but that wouldn’t  be fair either.

Hydrogen *can* be cleaner, and actually is frequently.

For someone who wanted to jump into the deep data, something I learned recently 
is that for those charging from the grid at night, the energy they are using is 
virtually all non-renewable (fossil). And I’m told that most of it is from 
fracked natural gas.(this is all California perspective - other areas use more 
coal on the grid)

For those of you that are thinking that faced with this information, battery EV 
are not worth pushing any more (haha), I’ll say that you are still wrong. BOTH 
are still important, and needed.  And that’s been my point from the beginning.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone


 On Dec 23, 2018, at 5:21 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:

 Mark,
 Thanks for posting this. Maybe someone else can benefit from it but I really 
don't know how to use this spreadsheet nor do I have the time to dedicate to 
learning it. If you would be able to answer the fundamental question, which I 
think can be done without reference to this spreadsheet, that would be most 
helpful.
 Peri

 -- Original Message --
 From: "Mark Abramowitz" 
 To: "Peri Hartman" ; "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 

 Sent: 23-Dec-18 3:34:36 PM
 Subject: Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG 
emissions) than the grid


 I’ll you interpret the the results.

 I’ve seen a number of summary charts that various people have created, but you 
seem to want detail, so here are the detailed results of the current GREET 
model - California version:

 CA GREET model 2.0 results

 https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/ca_greet1.8b_dec09.xls

 Note: I don’t think that CO2 numbers are total CO2 equivalent (check this), so 
you might want to look at GHGs rather than CO2, if that’s the metric you want. 
Then again, I don’t know those numbers are CO2 equivalent either.

 Have fun.

 - Mark

 Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone


 On Dec 23, 2018, at 12:59 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:

 Alright, Mark, then let's look at it from a point of view of emissions (CO2 in 
particular). Do you have references showing that emissions from producing 
hydrogen (from non fossil fuels) have less than emissions from producing 
electricity for the same amount of traction energy?

 Peri



 ___
 UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
 http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
 Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)






___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

See the subject of the thread for the bottom line answer, though things are 
never as simple as a one-liner. But I gave you my answer, and you didn’t want 
to accept it.

I also gave you the reasons why, but you wanted sources, so there’s the table.

I really don’t use this table - it was just to give you the info you wanted. I 
could pick and choose data pieces, but that wouldn’t  be fair either. 

Hydrogen *can* be cleaner, and actually is frequently. 

For someone who wanted to jump into the deep data, something I learned recently 
is that for those charging from the grid at night, the energy they are using is 
virtually all non-renewable (fossil). And I’m told that most of it is from 
fracked natural gas.(this is all California perspective - other areas use more 
coal on the grid)

For those of you that are thinking that faced with this information, battery EV 
are not worth pushing any more (haha), I’ll say that you are still wrong. BOTH 
are still important, and needed.  And that’s been my point from the beginning.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Dec 23, 2018, at 5:21 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
> 
> Mark,
> Thanks for posting this. Maybe someone else can benefit from it but I really 
> don't know how to use this spreadsheet nor do I have the time to dedicate to 
> learning it. If you would be able to answer the fundamental question, which I 
> think can be done without reference to this spreadsheet, that would be most 
> helpful.
> Peri
> 
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Mark Abramowitz" 
> To: "Peri Hartman" ; "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
> 
> Sent: 23-Dec-18 3:34:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG 
> emissions) than the grid
> 
>> I’ll you interpret the the results.
>> 
>> I’ve seen a number of summary charts that various people have created, but 
>> you seem to want detail, so here are the detailed results of the current 
>> GREET model - California version:
>> 
>> CA GREET model 2.0 results
>> 
>> https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/ca_greet1.8b_dec09.xls
>> 
>> Note: I don’t think that CO2 numbers are total CO2 equivalent (check this), 
>> so you might want to look at GHGs rather than CO2, if that’s the metric you 
>> want. Then again, I don’t know those numbers are CO2 equivalent either.
>> 
>> Have fun.
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>> 
>>> On Dec 23, 2018, at 12:59 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Alright, Mark, then let's look at it from a point of view of emissions (CO2 
>>> in particular). Do you have references showing that emissions from 
>>> producing hydrogen (from non fossil fuels) have less than emissions from 
>>> producing electricity for the same amount of traction energy?
>>> 
>>> Peri
>>> 
> 
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 
> 

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[Peri Hartman via EV]

Mark,
Thanks for posting this. Maybe someone else can benefit from it but I 
really don't know how to use this spreadsheet nor do I have the time to 
dedicate to learning it. If you would be able to answer the fundamental 
question, which I think can be done without reference to this 
spreadsheet, that would be most helpful.

Peri

-- Original Message --
From: "Mark Abramowitz" 
To: "Peri Hartman" ; "Electric Vehicle Discussion 
List" 

Sent: 23-Dec-18 3:34:36 PM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” 
(GHG emissions) than the grid



I’ll you interpret the the results.

I’ve seen a number of summary charts that various people have created, 
but you seem to want detail, so here are the detailed results of the 
current GREET model - California version:


CA GREET model 2.0 results

https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/ca_greet1.8b_dec09.xls

Note: I don’t think that CO2 numbers are total CO2 equivalent (check 
this), so you might want to look at GHGs rather than CO2, if that’s the 
metric you want. Then again, I don’t know those numbers are CO2 
equivalent either.


Have fun.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

On Dec 23, 2018, at 12:59 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  
wrote:


Alright, Mark, then let's look at it from a point of view of emissions 
(CO2 in particular). Do you have references showing that emissions 
from producing hydrogen (from non fossil fuels) have less than 
emissions from producing electricity for the same amount of traction 
energy?


Peri



___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Thinking about this, I know someone at UCI that may have the data that you are 
looking for - I will ask.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Dec 23, 2018, at 11:55 AM, Mark Abramowitz  wrote:
> 
> To be clear, my interest is in emissions and not source efficiency. If you 
> want source efficiency, ride a horse. Even better, ride a bike. That’s not 
> meant to be a smart aleck response, but to point out that those are more 
> efficient, but don’t have a lot of the other benefits that might be needed.
> 
> For you own search about source efficiency, DOE is a good place, but not that 
> efficiencies (and cost and densities) are changing quickly, and aren’t always 
> public.
> 
> Because of all this, it makes these exercises purely academic, as well as a 
> lot of work to get poor data.
> 
> And environmental costs open up a whole new level of complexity, though by 
> not including post-life disposal and recycling, it’s a little more simple. 
> But still complex, particularly since there are many pathways to producing 
> (and using) both hydrogen and electricity.
> 
> There are many expert in pieces of this, but I’m not one of those.
> 
> But besides the main DOE website, try the sites for the DOE National Labs, 
> particularly NREL and Argonne. But much of that data is out of date, too.
> 
> The web sites of the California Fuel Cell Partnership (CaFCP.org) and the 
> California Hydrogen Business Council (californiahydrogen.org) may have pieces 
> of Information on them that you may find useful, with the CHBC site expecting 
> much more posting in the near future.
> 
> - Mark
> 
> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
> 
>> On Dec 23, 2018, at 9:06 AM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
>> 
>> Mark, you're the one advocating for non fossil fuel based hydrogen 
>> generation, which is fine. I presume you are among the most knowledgeable 
>> people of how to generate this fuel. It would be very helpful if you could 
>> substantiate the claims being made with some quality references, rather than 
>> asking me to "do your own homework." Actually, I have done some looking and 
>> not found anything that shows cracking is more efficient than using the 
>> electricity directly in BEVs.
>> 
>> I don't want to focus on whether BEVs are better or not than fuel cell EVs. 
>> Just which is a more efficient usage of source energy. That could include 
>> the environmental costs of manufacturing each type of distribution and 
>> storage systems.
>> 
>> Peri
>> 
>> -- Original Message --
>> From: "Mark Abramowitz" 
>> To: "Peri Hartman" ; "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
>> 
>> Sent: 22-Dec-18 9:25:08 PM
>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG 
>> emissions) than the grid
>> 
>>> “On a path” are my words.
>>> 
>>> What *I* mean is that there are technologies existing and there are 
>>> technologies being developed and improved that can provide us with 
>>> fossil-free hydrogen AND the industry is committed to using these 
>>> technologies to getting to 100%. For several years, they’ve outperformed 
>>> the grid on this metric.
>>> 
>>> As far as cracking efficiencies, just one of the technologies, efficiencies 
>>> have been improving significantly. You’ll have to do your own homework on 
>>> the rate of improvements. Just like batteries have many ways to produce 
>>> electricity, there are many path ways to produce (and use) hydrogen.
>>> 
>>> Whether batteries are *better*, my own opinion is that it depends. It’s 
>>> another way of storing energy. It depends on the use. In vehicles, it 
>>> depends on duty cycle, cost, infrastructure, a whole host of things. I 
>>> don’t get too excited over the storage method of the energy. Others are 
>>> pathological over it. I guess it’s like “Go Raiders!”
>>> 
> To be clear, my interest is in emissions and not source efficiency. If you 
> want source efficiency, ride a horse. Even better, ride a bike. That’s not 
> meant to be a smart aleck response, but to point out that those are more 
> efficient, but don’t have a lot of the other benefits that might be needed.
> 
> For you own search about source efficiency, DOE is a good place, but not that 
> efficiencies (and cost and densities) are changing quickly, and aren’t always 
> public.
> 
> Because of all this, it makes these exercises purely academic, as well as a 
> lot of work to get poor data.
> 
> And environmental costs open up a whole new level of complexity, though by 

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

To be clear, my interest is in emissions and not source efficiency. If you want 
source efficiency, ride a horse. Even better, ride a bike. That’s not meant to 
be a smart aleck response, but to point out that those are more efficient, but 
don’t have a lot of the other benefits that might be needed.

For you own search about source efficiency, DOE is a good place, but not that 
efficiencies (and cost and densities) are changing quickly, and aren’t always 
public.

Because of all this, it makes these exercises purely academic, as well as a lot 
of work to get poor data.

And environmental costs open up a whole new level of complexity, though by not 
including post-life disposal and recycling, it’s a little more simple. But 
still complex, particularly since there are many pathways to producing (and 
using) both hydrogen and electricity.

There are many expert in pieces of this, but I’m not one of those.

But besides the main DOE website, try the sites for the DOE National Labs, 
particularly NREL and Argonne. But much of that data is out of date, too.

The web sites of the California Fuel Cell Partnership (CaFCP.org) and the 
California Hydrogen Business Council (californiahydrogen.org) may have pieces 
of Information on them that you may find useful, with the CHBC site expecting 
much more posting in the near future.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Dec 23, 2018, at 9:06 AM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
> 
> Mark, you're the one advocating for non fossil fuel based hydrogen 
> generation, which is fine. I presume you are among the most knowledgeable 
> people of how to generate this fuel. It would be very helpful if you could 
> substantiate the claims being made with some quality references, rather than 
> asking me to "do your own homework." Actually, I have done some looking and 
> not found anything that shows cracking is more efficient than using the 
> electricity directly in BEVs.
> 
> I don't want to focus on whether BEVs are better or not than fuel cell EVs. 
> Just which is a more efficient usage of source energy. That could include the 
> environmental costs of manufacturing each type of distribution and storage 
> systems.
> 
> Peri
> 
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Mark Abramowitz" 
> To: "Peri Hartman" ; "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
> 
> Sent: 22-Dec-18 9:25:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG 
> emissions) than the grid
> 
>> “On a path” are my words.
>> 
>> What *I* mean is that there are technologies existing and there are 
>> technologies being developed and improved that can provide us with 
>> fossil-free hydrogen AND the industry is committed to using these 
>> technologies to getting to 100%. For several years, they’ve outperformed the 
>> grid on this metric.
>> 
>> As far as cracking efficiencies, just one of the technologies, efficiencies 
>> have been improving significantly. You’ll have to do your own homework on 
>> the rate of improvements. Just like batteries have many ways to produce 
>> electricity, there are many path ways to produce (and use) hydrogen.
>> 
>> Whether batteries are *better*, my own opinion is that it depends. It’s 
>> another way of storing energy. It depends on the use. In vehicles, it 
>> depends on duty cycle, cost, infrastructure, a whole host of things. I don’t 
>> get too excited over the storage method of the energy. Others are 
>> pathological over it. I guess it’s like “Go Raiders!”
>> 
>> As far as infrastructure, some in the BEV industry would take strong 
>> exception with your assertion that additional infrastructure isn’t needed. I 
>> won’t jump into that fight.
>> 
>> But you are right that at least initially, there needs to be a robust 
>> fueling infrastructure. I like the idea of replacing fossil fuel stations 
>> with renewable energy stations.
>> 
>> But there is also work ongoing towards replacing the natural gas in 
>> pipelines going to your home with hydrogen.
>> 
>> Lastly, as far as your point about an industry that relies on fossil fuels, 
>> the whole point of my original post was to show that the industry is 
>> committed to *not* using polluting fossil fuels, and to eliminate those as a 
>> source of the product in a timeframe faster than that of the grid.
>> 
>> To date, they have already been surpassing the electrical grid in moving 
>> away.
> Mark, you're the one advocating for non fossil fuel based hydrogen 
> generation, which is fine. I presume you are among the most knowledgeable 
> people of how to generate this fuel. It would be very helpful if you could 
> substantiate the claims being

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[Peri Hartman via EV]

Alright, Mark, then let's look at it from a point of view of emissions 
(CO2 in particular). Do you have references showing that emissions from 
producing hydrogen (from non fossil fuels) have less than emissions from 
producing electricity for the same amount of traction energy?


Peri

-- Original Message --
From: "Mark Abramowitz" 
To: "Peri Hartman" ; "Electric Vehicle Discussion 
List" 

Sent: 23-Dec-18 11:55:15 AM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” 
(GHG emissions) than the grid



To be clear, my interest is in emissions and not source efficiency. If you want 
source efficiency, ride a horse. Even better, ride a bike. That’s not meant to 
be a smart aleck response, but to point out that those are more efficient, but 
don’t have a lot of the other benefits that might be needed.

For you own search about source efficiency, DOE is a good place, but not that 
efficiencies (and cost and densities) are changing quickly, and aren’t always 
public.

Because of all this, it makes these exercises purely academic, as well as a lot 
of work to get poor data.

And environmental costs open up a whole new level of complexity, though by not 
including post-life disposal and recycling, it’s a little more simple. But 
still complex, particularly since there are many pathways to producing (and 
using) both hydrogen and electricity.

There are many expert in pieces of this, but I’m not one of those.

But besides the main DOE website, try the sites for the DOE National Labs, 
particularly NREL and Argonne. But much of that data is out of date, too.

The web sites of the California Fuel Cell Partnership (CaFCP.org) and the 
California Hydrogen Business Council (californiahydrogen.org) may have pieces 
of Information on them that you may find useful, with the CHBC site expecting 
much more posting in the near future.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone


 On Dec 23, 2018, at 9:06 AM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:

 Mark, you're the one advocating for non fossil fuel based hydrogen generation, which is 
fine. I presume you are among the most knowledgeable people of how to generate this fuel. 
It would be very helpful if you could substantiate the claims being made with some 
quality references, rather than asking me to "do your own homework." Actually, 
I have done some looking and not found anything that shows cracking is more efficient 
than using the electricity directly in BEVs.

 I don't want to focus on whether BEVs are better or not than fuel cell EVs. 
Just which is a more efficient usage of source energy. That could include the 
environmental costs of manufacturing each type of distribution and storage 
systems.

 Peri

 -- Original Message --
 From: "Mark Abramowitz" 
 To: "Peri Hartman" ; "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 

 Sent: 22-Dec-18 9:25:08 PM
 Subject: Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG 
emissions) than the grid


 “On a path” are my words.

 What *I* mean is that there are technologies existing and there are 
technologies being developed and improved that can provide us with fossil-free 
hydrogen AND the industry is committed to using these technologies to getting 
to 100%. For several years, they’ve outperformed the grid on this metric.

 As far as cracking efficiencies, just one of the technologies, efficiencies 
have been improving significantly. You’ll have to do your own homework on the 
rate of improvements. Just like batteries have many ways to produce 
electricity, there are many path ways to produce (and use) hydrogen.

 Whether batteries are *better*, my own opinion is that it depends. It’s 
another way of storing energy. It depends on the use. In vehicles, it depends 
on duty cycle, cost, infrastructure, a whole host of things. I don’t get too 
excited over the storage method of the energy. Others are pathological over it. 
I guess it’s like “Go Raiders!”

 As far as infrastructure, some in the BEV industry would take strong exception 
with your assertion that additional infrastructure isn’t needed. I won’t jump 
into that fight.

 But you are right that at least initially, there needs to be a robust fueling 
infrastructure. I like the idea of replacing fossil fuel stations with 
renewable energy stations.

 But there is also work ongoing towards replacing the natural gas in pipelines 
going to your home with hydrogen.

 Lastly, as far as your point about an industry that relies on fossil fuels, 
the whole point of my original post was to show that the industry is committed 
to *not* using polluting fossil fuels, and to eliminate those as a source of 
the product in a timeframe faster than that of the grid.

 To date, they have already been surpassing the electrical grid in moving away.

 Mark, you're the one advocating for non fossil fuel based hydrogen generation, which is 
fine. I presume you are among the most knowledgeable

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[Peri Hartman via EV]

Mark, you're the one advocating for non fossil fuel based hydrogen 
generation, which is fine. I presume you are among the most 
knowledgeable people of how to generate this fuel. It would be very 
helpful if you could substantiate the claims being made with some 
quality references, rather than asking me to "do your own homework." 
Actually, I have done some looking and not found anything that shows 
cracking is more efficient than using the electricity directly in BEVs.


I don't want to focus on whether BEVs are better or not than fuel cell 
EVs. Just which is a more efficient usage of source energy. That could 
include the environmental costs of manufacturing each type of 
distribution and storage systems.


Peri

-- Original Message --
From: "Mark Abramowitz" 
To: "Peri Hartman" ; "Electric Vehicle Discussion 
List" 

Sent: 22-Dec-18 9:25:08 PM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” 
(GHG emissions) than the grid



“On a path” are my words.

What *I* mean is that there are technologies existing and there are 
technologies being developed and improved that can provide us with fossil-free 
hydrogen AND the industry is committed to using these technologies to getting 
to 100%. For several years, they’ve outperformed the grid on this metric.

As far as cracking efficiencies, just one of the technologies, efficiencies 
have been improving significantly. You’ll have to do your own homework on the 
rate of improvements. Just like batteries have many ways to produce 
electricity, there are many path ways to produce (and use) hydrogen.

Whether batteries are *better*, my own opinion is that it depends. It’s another 
way of storing energy. It depends on the use. In vehicles, it depends on duty 
cycle, cost, infrastructure, a whole host of things. I don’t get too excited 
over the storage method of the energy. Others are pathological over it. I guess 
it’s like “Go Raiders!”

As far as infrastructure, some in the BEV industry would take strong exception 
with your assertion that additional infrastructure isn’t needed. I won’t jump 
into that fight.

But you are right that at least initially, there needs to be a robust fueling 
infrastructure. I like the idea of replacing fossil fuel stations with 
renewable energy stations.

But there is also work ongoing towards replacing the natural gas in pipelines 
going to your home with hydrogen.

Lastly, as far as your point about an industry that relies on fossil fuels, the 
whole point of my original post was to show that the industry is committed to 
*not* using polluting fossil fuels, and to eliminate those as a source of the 
product in a timeframe faster than that of the grid.

To date, they have already been surpassing the electrical grid in moving away.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone


 On Dec 22, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:

 I, too, question the meaning of "on a path of 100% carbon-free hydrogen." It's 
one thing to have a goal and another to be on a path. The latter implies that the 
technology exists and needs to be scaled (and perhaps optimized).

 The only technology I'm aware of is using electricity to "crack" water. It's my 
understanding that the process is so inefficient that it's better to use the electricity directly 
(and store it in batteries). If that's the technology behind the "path" then please 
explain why that process is better than using batteries.

 The other major problem is infrastructure. Unlike EVs, you can't charge at 
home. So we would need to build out a filling station network equally robust as 
the petrol system we have today. I suppose you could say that it's partly built 
since the physical stations exist. But I expect there is extreme cost in 
installing large hydrogen tanks and providing the complex tank-to-car filling 
systems.

 If one is looking at the benefits of hydrogen generated from natural gas, 
there are some positive arguments. I won't go into that since I do not want to 
support a technology that continues to depend on fossil fuels.

 Since a lot of businesses and the government are on board with this, perhaps 
there's something completely wrong with my assumptions. Please correct me.

 Peri

 -- Original Message --
 From: "Mark Abramowitz via EV" 
 To: ev@lists.evdl.org
 Cc: "Mark Abramowitz" 
 Sent: 20-Dec-18 5:49:16 PM
 Subject: Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG 
emissions) than the grid


 Sorry, that last part should read “though unintentionally”

 - Mark

 Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone


 On Dec 20, 2018, at 5:37 PM, Mark Abramowitz  wrote:

 Some of you know that I’ve been an advocate for BEVs for a number of decades, 
and of hydrogen fuel cell EVs (the “other” electric vehicle) for a bit less.

 In my day job, I recommend and advocate major funding of both battery 
electrics and hydrogen fuel 

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I’ve not read it, and am not familiar with it, but can tell you that the 
industry has changed quite a bit.

Remember how the BEV industry was just 10 years ago, 20 years ago, and 30 years 
and more ago.

Back then, while pushing for years for a ZEV mandate, I heard many of the same 
arguments used by the auto and oil companies about BEVs as I have heard for 
several years about hydrogen.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Dec 22, 2018, at 8:13 PM, Gail Lucas via EV  wrote:
> 
> One of our long term list members, Darryl McMahon, who I think still 
> contributes here occasionally, wrote a book on hydrogen several years ago. It 
> is available on Amazon as well as from his own site. Covers things being 
> discussed here.
> 
> http://www.econogics.com/TENHE/index.htm
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Emperors-New-Hydrogen-Economy/dp/0595392296/
> 
> Nice man, EV advocate for ages. Met him when he visited Las Vegas quite a few 
> years ago.
> 
> Gail
> 
>> On 12/21/2018 5:24 AM, Willie via EV wrote:
>>> On 12/21/18 6:58 AM, Mark Abramowitz wrote:
>>> Willie,
>>> 
>>> Fuel cell vehicles are NOT off-topic (check the charter), but I put OT in 
>>> there just because I thought that this particular conversation was OT - but 
>>> perhaps it isn’t OT.
>>> 
>>> Is there a future? Not really the subject of the post, and also a question 
>>> I’m not sure how I would ever answer a question like that with a “source”. 
>>> So I’ll avoid thread-crapping my own thread.
>> Well, you seemed to be our window to the hydrogen world.  Surely "the 
>> hydrogen people" have some real or hoped for solutions to the distribution 
>> and efficiencies problems.  Else, they would not be pursuing.  At least 
>> sincere and honest people would not be pursuing.
>>> Yes, decarbonized hydrogen can absolutely include cracked water. I don’t 
>>> know what the original intent of the Hydrogen Council was, but I would 
>>> think that it would also include non-petroleum based natural gas.
>> The concept of "non-petroleum natural gas" was foreign to me.  But I now see 
>> and guess that might be feed lot and landfill methane.  I don't see how 
>> "non-petroleum natural gas" would be more virtuous than real natural gas. Or 
>> somehow be associated with "decarbonized hydrogen".  Of course, "cracked 
>> water" has the advantage of being free of the carbon stigma if the electric 
>> power used has wind/PV/etc sources.
>> Thanks!
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 
> 

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

“On a path” are my words.

What *I* mean is that there are technologies existing and there are 
technologies being developed and improved that can provide us with fossil-free 
hydrogen AND the industry is committed to using these technologies to getting 
to 100%. For several years, they’ve outperformed the grid on this metric.

As far as cracking efficiencies, just one of the technologies, efficiencies 
have been improving significantly. You’ll have to do your own homework on the 
rate of improvements. Just like batteries have many ways to produce 
electricity, there are many path ways to produce (and use) hydrogen.

Whether batteries are *better*, my own opinion is that it depends. It’s another 
way of storing energy. It depends on the use. In vehicles, it depends on duty 
cycle, cost, infrastructure, a whole host of things. I don’t get too excited 
over the storage method of the energy. Others are pathological over it. I guess 
it’s like “Go Raiders!” 

As far as infrastructure, some in the BEV industry would take strong exception 
with your assertion that additional infrastructure isn’t needed. I won’t jump 
into that fight.

But you are right that at least initially, there needs to be a robust fueling 
infrastructure. I like the idea of replacing fossil fuel stations with 
renewable energy stations.

But there is also work ongoing towards replacing the natural gas in pipelines 
going to your home with hydrogen. 

Lastly, as far as your point about an industry that relies on fossil fuels, the 
whole point of my original post was to show that the industry is committed to 
*not* using polluting fossil fuels, and to eliminate those as a source of the 
product in a timeframe faster than that of the grid. 

To date, they have already been surpassing the electrical grid in moving away.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Dec 22, 2018, at 4:49 PM, Peri Hartman via EV  wrote:
> 
> I, too, question the meaning of "on a path of 100% carbon-free hydrogen." 
> It's one thing to have a goal and another to be on a path. The latter implies 
> that the technology exists and needs to be scaled (and perhaps optimized).
> 
> The only technology I'm aware of is using electricity to "crack" water. It's 
> my understanding that the process is so inefficient that it's better to use 
> the electricity directly (and store it in batteries). If that's the 
> technology behind the "path" then please explain why that process is better 
> than using batteries.
> 
> The other major problem is infrastructure. Unlike EVs, you can't charge at 
> home. So we would need to build out a filling station network equally robust 
> as the petrol system we have today. I suppose you could say that it's partly 
> built since the physical stations exist. But I expect there is extreme cost 
> in installing large hydrogen tanks and providing the complex tank-to-car 
> filling systems.
> 
> If one is looking at the benefits of hydrogen generated from natural gas, 
> there are some positive arguments. I won't go into that since I do not want 
> to support a technology that continues to depend on fossil fuels.
> 
> Since a lot of businesses and the government are on board with this, perhaps 
> there's something completely wrong with my assumptions. Please correct me.
> 
> Peri
> 
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Mark Abramowitz via EV" 
> To: ev@lists.evdl.org
> Cc: "Mark Abramowitz" 
> Sent: 20-Dec-18 5:49:16 PM
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG 
> emissions) than the grid
> 
>> Sorry, that last part should read “though unintentionally”
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>> 
>>> On Dec 20, 2018, at 5:37 PM, Mark Abramowitz  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Some of you know that I’ve been an advocate for BEVs for a number of 
>>> decades, and of hydrogen fuel cell EVs (the “other” electric vehicle) for a 
>>> bit less.
>>> 
>>> In my day job, I recommend and advocate major funding of both battery 
>>> electrics and hydrogen fuel cell applications.
>>> 
>>> One of my many volunteer roles (“working for free” as Bruce would put it) 
>>> is serving as Immediate Past Chair of the California Hydrogen Business 
>>> Council.
>>> 
>>> As some of you may know, the renewable content of hydrogen used in 
>>> transportation exceeds that of the grid. And the industry itself is on a 
>>> path of 100% carbon-free hydrogen .
>>> 
>>> Not long ago, the Hydrogen Council, made up of the CEOs of leaders in the 
>>> industry, released a formal policy supporting 100% carbon-free in 
>>> transportation hydrogen by 2030. This is 15 

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[Gail Lucas via EV]

One of our long term list members, Darryl McMahon, who I think still 
contributes here occasionally, wrote a book on hydrogen several years 
ago. It is available on Amazon as well as from his own site. Covers 
things being discussed here.


http://www.econogics.com/TENHE/index.htm

https://www.amazon.com/Emperors-New-Hydrogen-Economy/dp/0595392296/

Nice man, EV advocate for ages. Met him when he visited Las Vegas quite 
a few years ago.


Gail

On 12/21/2018 5:24 AM, Willie via EV wrote:



On 12/21/18 6:58 AM, Mark Abramowitz wrote:

Willie,

Fuel cell vehicles are NOT off-topic (check the charter), but I put OT 
in there just because I thought that this particular conversation was 
OT - but perhaps it isn’t OT.


Is there a future? Not really the subject of the post, and also a 
question I’m not sure how I would ever answer a question like that 
with a “source”. So I’ll avoid thread-crapping my own thread.


Well, you seemed to be our window to the hydrogen world.  Surely "the 
hydrogen people" have some real or hoped for solutions to the 
distribution and efficiencies problems.  Else, they would not be 
pursuing.  At least sincere and honest people would not be pursuing.


Yes, decarbonized hydrogen can absolutely include cracked water. I 
don’t know what the original intent of the Hydrogen Council was, but I 
would think that it would also include non-petroleum based natural gas.


The concept of "non-petroleum natural gas" was foreign to me.  But I now 
see and guess that might be feed lot and landfill methane.  I don't see 
how "non-petroleum natural gas" would be more virtuous than real natural 
gas. Or somehow be associated with "decarbonized hydrogen".  Of course, 
"cracked water" has the advantage of being free of the carbon stigma if 
the electric power used has wind/PV/etc sources.


Thanks!

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[Peri Hartman via EV]

I, too, question the meaning of "on a path of 100% carbon-free 
hydrogen." It's one thing to have a goal and another to be on a path. 
The latter implies that the technology exists and needs to be scaled 
(and perhaps optimized).


The only technology I'm aware of is using electricity to "crack" water. 
It's my understanding that the process is so inefficient that it's 
better to use the electricity directly (and store it in batteries). If 
that's the technology behind the "path" then please explain why that 
process is better than using batteries.


The other major problem is infrastructure. Unlike EVs, you can't charge 
at home. So we would need to build out a filling station network equally 
robust as the petrol system we have today. I suppose you could say that 
it's partly built since the physical stations exist. But I expect there 
is extreme cost in installing large hydrogen tanks and providing the 
complex tank-to-car filling systems.


If one is looking at the benefits of hydrogen generated from natural 
gas, there are some positive arguments. I won't go into that since I do 
not want to support a technology that continues to depend on fossil 
fuels.


Since a lot of businesses and the government are on board with this, 
perhaps there's something completely wrong with my assumptions. Please 
correct me.


Peri

-- Original Message --
From: "Mark Abramowitz via EV" 
To: ev@lists.evdl.org
Cc: "Mark Abramowitz" 
Sent: 20-Dec-18 5:49:16 PM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” 
(GHG emissions) than the grid



Sorry, that last part should read “though unintentionally”

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone


 On Dec 20, 2018, at 5:37 PM, Mark Abramowitz  wrote:

 Some of you know that I’ve been an advocate for BEVs for a number of decades, 
and of hydrogen fuel cell EVs (the “other” electric vehicle) for a bit less.

 In my day job, I recommend and advocate major funding of both battery 
electrics and hydrogen fuel cell applications.

 One of my many volunteer roles (“working for free” as Bruce would put it) is 
serving as Immediate Past Chair of the California Hydrogen Business Council.

 As some of you may know, the renewable content of hydrogen used in 
transportation exceeds that of the grid. And the industry itself is on a path 
of 100% carbon-free hydrogen .

 Not long ago, the Hydrogen Council, made up of the CEOs of leaders in the 
industry, released a formal policy supporting 100% carbon-free in 
transportation hydrogen by 2030. This is 15 years before the 100% carbon-free 
grid date of 2045 adopted by the California legislature.

 Tomorrow a release will go out announcing the support of this policy by the 
California Hydrogen Business Council.

 The adopted language follows.  For those of you who have completely misstated 
the facts, though intentionally, I hope that you will read it carefully.

 December 18, 2018

 CHBC Endorses Full Decarbonization Goal of Hydrogen in Transportation by 2030

 The California Hydrogen Business Council (CHBC) on behalf of its members is 
pleased to endorse the commitment of the Hydrogen Council to the goal of 
decarbonizing 100% of hydrogen fuel used in transport by 2030.

 The goal was announced by the Hydrogen Council on September 14, 2018 at the 
Global Climate Action Summit in San Francisco, hosted by Governor Brown:

 “The Hydrogen Council, a global CEO coalition bringing together 50+ leaders in 
the energy, transport and industry space, is committed to an ambitious goal of 
ensuring that 100% of hydrogen fuel used in different modes of transportation 
is decarbonised by 2030. We are therefore calling on governments to build a 
global alliance that will create the necessary regulatory frameworks to help 
make this commitment a reality. Transport may be our first target, but with 
right level of support we will see positive effects across many sectors. We 
believe hydrogen can play a key role in the clean energy transition and we are 
ready to work together with governments to help create the right technical, 
financial and legislative environment that will enable decarbonised hydrogen to 
scale up.”

 Through this commitment to the 2030 goal, hydrogen for transportation can 
achieve full decarbonization 15 years ahead of the SB 100 mandate of 100% 
carbon-free electricity by 2045.  Attainment of the stated goal of 100% 
carbon-free hydrogen fuel by 2030 will maintain the position of hydrogen fuel 
cell electric drive as the lowest-carbon alternative among electric drive 
solutions.
 The hydrogen industry is committed to helping California dramatically reduce 
emissions despite increasing transportation demand by providing a clean fuel 
that has proven itself in both on- and off-road applications and is emerging as 
an important alternative to diesel in marine, rail and port applications.


 - Mark

 Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Well, the charter is the charter, and it makes sense.

That being said, I prefer to do my talking about fuel cells in other forums.  
And except for this post that I knew would be of interest to many here, I never 
start any threads about fuel cells. And here, am trying to make sure that 
thread stays focused and not run amuck (yep, it’s a small minority always 
ruining it for everyone else).

Personally, as I’ve said before, the exciting thing about this list to me are 
the great hobbyist EV posts we get here.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Dec 21, 2018, at 2:10 PM, EVDL Administrator via EV  
> wrote:
> 
>> On 21 Dec 2018 at 4:58, Mark Abramowitz via EV wrote:
>> 
>> Fuel cell vehicles are NOT off-topic (check the charter)
> 
> Correct.  However, if you read this page
> 
> http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#conv
> 
> You will find this statement:
> 
> "Many years ago, EVDL members decided that fuel cell vehicles and hydrogen 
> power were not things they wanted to talk about much. I know, I just quoted 
> the charter up there, and it says "the energy storage device ... can [be a] 
> ... fuel cell ...," but that's what the members decided, and who am I to 
> argue?"
> 
> IIRC, this was decided with an online poll something over 20 years ago.  I 
> think it was Bruce who compiled the votes -- thanks Bruce!
> 
> David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
> EVDL Administrator
> 
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
> Note: mail sent to "evpost" and "etpost" addresses will not 
> reach me.  To send a private message, please obtain my 
> email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> 
> 
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[EVDL Administrator via EV]

On 21 Dec 2018 at 4:58, Mark Abramowitz via EV wrote:

> Fuel cell vehicles are NOT off-topic (check the charter)

Correct.  However, if you read this page

http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#conv

You will find this statement:

"Many years ago, EVDL members decided that fuel cell vehicles and hydrogen 
power were not things they wanted to talk about much. I know, I just quoted 
the charter up there, and it says "the energy storage device ... can [be a] 
... fuel cell ...," but that's what the members decided, and who am I to 
argue?"

IIRC, this was decided with an online poll something over 20 years ago.  I 
think it was Bruce who compiled the votes -- thanks Bruce!

David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EVDL Administrator

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
Note: mail sent to "evpost" and "etpost" addresses will not 
reach me.  To send a private message, please obtain my 
email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

For those with a strong aversion to relying on fossil fuels, the use of 
non-petroleum gas is certainly more virtuous than using regular Nat gas.

For those concerned about greenhouse gases emissions, use of non-fossil natural 
gas can result in a net *decrease* of GHG emissions.(if you have questions on 
this, the best place to look at the California Air Resources Board individual 
approved pathways for GHG reductions).

And yes, many of us remain excited about electrolytic hydrogen using renewable 
energy sources, particularly since it can help solve the problems many 
countries are running into where wind/solar resource use needs to be curtailed.

Perhaps the most exciting thing about the Hydrogen Council announcement is the 
breadth of company CEOs that have signed on to the commitment.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Dec 21, 2018, at 5:24 AM, Willie  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 12/21/18 6:58 AM, Mark Abramowitz wrote:
>> Willie,
>> Fuel cell vehicles are NOT off-topic (check the charter), but I put OT in 
>> there just because I thought that this particular conversation was OT - but 
>> perhaps it isn’t OT.
>> Is there a future? Not really the subject of the post, and also a question 
>> I’m not sure how I would ever answer a question like that with a “source”. 
>> So I’ll avoid thread-crapping my own thread.
> 
> Well, you seemed to be our window to the hydrogen world.  Surely "the 
> hydrogen people" have some real or hoped for solutions to the distribution 
> and efficiencies problems.  Else, they would not be pursuing.  At least 
> sincere and honest people would not be pursuing.
> 
>> Yes, decarbonized hydrogen can absolutely include cracked water. I don’t 
>> know what the original intent of the Hydrogen Council was, but I would think 
>> that it would also include non-petroleum based natural gas.
> 
> The concept of "non-petroleum natural gas" was foreign to me.  But I now see 
> and guess that might be feed lot and landfill methane.  I don't see how 
> "non-petroleum natural gas" would be more virtuous than real natural gas. Or 
> somehow be associated with "decarbonized hydrogen".  Of course, "cracked 
> water" has the advantage of being free of the carbon stigma if the electric 
> power used has wind/PV/etc sources.
> 
> Thanks!
> 

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Willie, 

Fuel cell vehicles are NOT off-topic (check the charter), but I put OT in there 
just because I thought that this particular conversation was OT - but perhaps 
it isn’t OT.

Is there a future? Not really the subject of the post, and also a question I’m 
not sure how I would ever answer a question like that with a “source”. So I’ll 
avoid thread-crapping my own thread.

Yes, decarbonized hydrogen can absolutely include cracked water. I don’t know 
what the original intent of the Hydrogen Council was, but I would think that it 
would also include non-petroleum based natural gas.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Dec 21, 2018, at 4:33 AM, Willie via EV  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 12/20/18 7:49 PM, Mark Abramowitz via EV wrote:
>> Sorry, that last part should read “though unintentionally”
>> - Mark
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>>> On Dec 20, 2018, at 5:37 PM, Mark Abramowitz  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Some of you know that I’ve been an advocate for BEVs for a number of 
>>> decades, and of hydrogen fuel cell EVs (the “other” electric vehicle) for a 
>>> bit less.
> 
> Assuming hydrogen vehicles are off topic here as you indicate, perhaps you 
> can point me to information that supports your apparent belief that there is 
> a future for hydrogen?
> 
> I supposed "decarbonized hydrogen" is from electrically "cracked" water 
> rather than from natural gas?  Will any source you cite address the 
> efficiency and distribution problems?
> 
> Hydrogen does seem like a very obvious dead end to me but I'm open to 
> additional information.  I do find it intriguing that Toyota, Nikola and 
> others seem so willing to pour money down an apparent rat hole.  Though I do 
> understand that Toyota's primary motivation is delay of EV progress.
> 
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 
> 

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[Robert Bruninga via EV]

I don’t see anything in the statement that said HOW they were going to
decarbonize the generation of hydrogen.  The only method I know is the
inefficient use of electricity to hydrolyze hydrogen from water.  Yes, that
can work in places where surplus electricity is abundant… but is still
quite inefficient and the energy returned is still double the cost of
electricity (at about  4 cents per kWh wholesale).



Plus another 25% to compress it for use in “tanks” for cars.



Not even mentioning the total lack of any kind of distribution system…
compared to the outlet in everyone’s garage and parking lot.  IMHO the only
thing that might eventually be useful is from huge truck-depot to
truck-depot for long haul where only a single hydrogen station is needed.



Bob



*From:* Mark Abramowitz 
*Sent:* Thursday, December 20, 2018 11:46 PM
*To:* Robert Bruninga 
*Cc:* Electric Vehicle Discussion List 
*Subject:* Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner”
(GHG emissions) than the grid



Hey, it’s more than that in the statement, if you read carefully.



But you obviously have an FUD agenda, so the statement wasn’t really meant
for you. I won’t respond to you again.

- Mark



Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone


On Dec 20, 2018, at 8:28 PM, Robert Bruninga  wrote:

But just setting a goal to produce "carbon free hydrogen" is still just
snake oil, hog wash that can never compete with EVs.

bob
:

> On Dec 20, 2018, at 5:37 PM, Mark Abramowitz 
wrote:
>
> Some of you know that I’ve been an advocate for BEVs for a number of
decades, and of hydrogen fuel cell EVs (the “other” electric vehicle) for a
bit less.
>
> In my day job, I recommend and advocate major funding of both battery
electrics and hydrogen fuel cell applications.
>
> One of my many volunteer roles (“working for free” as Bruce would put it)
is serving as Immediate Past Chair of the California Hydrogen Business
Council.
>
> As some of you may know, the renewable content of hydrogen used in
transportation exceeds that of the grid. And the industry itself is on a
path of 100% carbon-free hydrogen .
>
> Not long ago, the Hydrogen Council, made up of the CEOs of leaders in the
industry, released a formal policy supporting 100% carbon-free in
transportation hydrogen by 2030. This is 15 years before the 100%
carbon-free grid date of 2045 adopted by the California legislature.
>
> Tomorrow a release will go out announcing the support of this policy by
the California Hydrogen Business Council.
>
> The adopted language follows.  For those of you who have completely
misstated the facts, though intentionally, I hope that you will read it
carefully.
>
> December 18, 2018
>
> CHBC Endorses Full Decarbonization Goal of Hydrogen in Transportation by
2030
>
> The California Hydrogen Business Council (CHBC) on behalf of its members
is pleased to endorse the commitment of the Hydrogen Council to the goal of
decarbonizing 100% of hydrogen fuel used in transport by 2030.
>
> The goal was announced by the Hydrogen Council on September 14, 2018 at
the Global Climate Action Summit in San Francisco, hosted by Governor Brown:
>
> “The Hydrogen Council, a global CEO coalition bringing together 50+
leaders in the energy, transport and industry space, is committed to an
ambitious goal of ensuring that 100% of hydrogen fuel used in different
modes of transportation is decarbonised by 2030. We are therefore calling
on governments to build a global alliance that will create the necessary
regulatory frameworks to help make this commitment a reality. Transport may
be our first target, but with right level of support we will see positive
effects across many sectors. We believe hydrogen can play a key role in the
clean energy transition and we are ready to work together with governments
to help create the right technical, financial and legislative environment
that will enable decarbonised hydrogen to scale up.”
>
> Through this commitment to the 2030 goal, hydrogen for transportation can
achieve full decarbonization 15 years ahead of the SB 100 mandate of 100%
carbon-free electricity by 2045.  Attainment of the stated goal of 100%
carbon-free hydrogen fuel by 2030 will maintain the position of hydrogen
fuel cell electric drive as the lowest-carbon alternative among electric
drive solutions.
> The hydrogen industry is committed to helping California dramatically
reduce emissions despite increasing transportation demand by providing a
clean fuel that has proven itself in both on- and off-road applications and
is emerging as an important alternative to diesel in marine, rail and port
applications.
>
>
> - Mark
>
> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20181220/0efd6348/attachment.html
>
_

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[Willie via EV]

On 12/21/18 6:58 AM, Mark Abramowitz wrote:

Willie,

Fuel cell vehicles are NOT off-topic (check the charter), but I put OT in there 
just because I thought that this particular conversation was OT - but perhaps 
it isn’t OT.

Is there a future? Not really the subject of the post, and also a question I’m 
not sure how I would ever answer a question like that with a “source”. So I’ll 
avoid thread-crapping my own thread.


Well, you seemed to be our window to the hydrogen world.  Surely "the 
hydrogen people" have some real or hoped for solutions to the 
distribution and efficiencies problems.  Else, they would not be 
pursuing.  At least sincere and honest people would not be pursuing.



Yes, decarbonized hydrogen can absolutely include cracked water. I don’t know 
what the original intent of the Hydrogen Council was, but I would think that it 
would also include non-petroleum based natural gas.


The concept of "non-petroleum natural gas" was foreign to me.  But I now 
see and guess that might be feed lot and landfill methane.  I don't see 
how "non-petroleum natural gas" would be more virtuous than real natural 
gas. Or somehow be associated with "decarbonized hydrogen".  Of course, 
"cracked water" has the advantage of being free of the carbon stigma if 
the electric power used has wind/PV/etc sources.


Thanks!
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[Willie via EV]

On 12/20/18 7:49 PM, Mark Abramowitz via EV wrote:

Sorry, that last part should read “though unintentionally”

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone


On Dec 20, 2018, at 5:37 PM, Mark Abramowitz  wrote:

Some of you know that I’ve been an advocate for BEVs for a number of decades, 
and of hydrogen fuel cell EVs (the “other” electric vehicle) for a bit less.


Assuming hydrogen vehicles are off topic here as you indicate, perhaps 
you can point me to information that supports your apparent belief that 
there is a future for hydrogen?


I supposed "decarbonized hydrogen" is from electrically "cracked" water 
rather than from natural gas?  Will any source you cite address the 
efficiency and distribution problems?


Hydrogen does seem like a very obvious dead end to me but I'm open to 
additional information.  I do find it intriguing that Toyota, Nikola and 
others seem so willing to pour money down an apparent rat hole.  Though 
I do understand that Toyota's primary motivation is delay of EV progress.


___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[Robert Bruninga via EV]

But just setting a goal to produce "carbon free hydrogen" is still just
snake oil, hog wash that can never compete with EVs.

bob
:

> > On Dec 20, 2018, at 5:37 PM, Mark Abramowitz 
> wrote:
> >
> > Some of you know that I’ve been an advocate for BEVs for a number of
> decades, and of hydrogen fuel cell EVs (the “other” electric vehicle) for a
> bit less.
> >
> > In my day job, I recommend and advocate major funding of both battery
> electrics and hydrogen fuel cell applications.
> >
> > One of my many volunteer roles (“working for free” as Bruce would put
> it) is serving as Immediate Past Chair of the California Hydrogen Business
> Council.
> >
> > As some of you may know, the renewable content of hydrogen used in
> transportation exceeds that of the grid. And the industry itself is on a
> path of 100% carbon-free hydrogen .
> >
> > Not long ago, the Hydrogen Council, made up of the CEOs of leaders in
> the industry, released a formal policy supporting 100% carbon-free in
> transportation hydrogen by 2030. This is 15 years before the 100%
> carbon-free grid date of 2045 adopted by the California legislature.
> >
> > Tomorrow a release will go out announcing the support of this policy by
> the California Hydrogen Business Council.
> >
> > The adopted language follows.  For those of you who have completely
> misstated the facts, though intentionally, I hope that you will read it
> carefully.
> >
> > December 18, 2018
> >
> > CHBC Endorses Full Decarbonization Goal of Hydrogen in Transportation by
> 2030
> >
> > The California Hydrogen Business Council (CHBC) on behalf of its members
> is pleased to endorse the commitment of the Hydrogen Council to the goal of
> decarbonizing 100% of hydrogen fuel used in transport by 2030.
> >
> > The goal was announced by the Hydrogen Council on September 14, 2018 at
> the Global Climate Action Summit in San Francisco, hosted by Governor Brown:
> >
> > “The Hydrogen Council, a global CEO coalition bringing together 50+
> leaders in the energy, transport and industry space, is committed to an
> ambitious goal of ensuring that 100% of hydrogen fuel used in different
> modes of transportation is decarbonised by 2030. We are therefore calling
> on governments to build a global alliance that will create the necessary
> regulatory frameworks to help make this commitment a reality. Transport may
> be our first target, but with right level of support we will see positive
> effects across many sectors. We believe hydrogen can play a key role in the
> clean energy transition and we are ready to work together with governments
> to help create the right technical, financial and legislative environment
> that will enable decarbonised hydrogen to scale up.”
> >
> > Through this commitment to the 2030 goal, hydrogen for transportation
> can achieve full decarbonization 15 years ahead of the SB 100 mandate of
> 100% carbon-free electricity by 2045.  Attainment of the stated goal of
> 100% carbon-free hydrogen fuel by 2030 will maintain the position of
> hydrogen fuel cell electric drive as the lowest-carbon alternative among
> electric drive solutions.
> > The hydrogen industry is committed to helping California dramatically
> reduce emissions despite increasing transportation demand by providing a
> clean fuel that has proven itself in both on- and off-road applications and
> is emerging as an important alternative to diesel in marine, rail and port
> applications.
> >
> >
> > - Mark
> >
> > Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20181220/0efd6348/attachment.html
> >
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] OT: Keeping hydrogen for transportation “cleaner” (GHG emissions) than the grid

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Sorry, that last part should read “though unintentionally”

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On Dec 20, 2018, at 5:37 PM, Mark Abramowitz  wrote:
> 
> Some of you know that I’ve been an advocate for BEVs for a number of decades, 
> and of hydrogen fuel cell EVs (the “other” electric vehicle) for a bit less.
> 
> In my day job, I recommend and advocate major funding of both battery 
> electrics and hydrogen fuel cell applications.
> 
> One of my many volunteer roles (“working for free” as Bruce would put it) is 
> serving as Immediate Past Chair of the California Hydrogen Business Council.
> 
> As some of you may know, the renewable content of hydrogen used in 
> transportation exceeds that of the grid. And the industry itself is on a path 
> of 100% carbon-free hydrogen . 
> 
> Not long ago, the Hydrogen Council, made up of the CEOs of leaders in the 
> industry, released a formal policy supporting 100% carbon-free in 
> transportation hydrogen by 2030. This is 15 years before the 100% carbon-free 
> grid date of 2045 adopted by the California legislature.
> 
> Tomorrow a release will go out announcing the support of this policy by the 
> California Hydrogen Business Council.
> 
> The adopted language follows.  For those of you who have completely misstated 
> the facts, though intentionally, I hope that you will read it carefully.
> 
> December 18, 2018
> 
> CHBC Endorses Full Decarbonization Goal of Hydrogen in Transportation by 2030
>  
> The California Hydrogen Business Council (CHBC) on behalf of its members is 
> pleased to endorse the commitment of the Hydrogen Council to the goal of 
> decarbonizing 100% of hydrogen fuel used in transport by 2030.
> 
> The goal was announced by the Hydrogen Council on September 14, 2018 at the 
> Global Climate Action Summit in San Francisco, hosted by Governor Brown:
> 
> “The Hydrogen Council, a global CEO coalition bringing together 50+ leaders 
> in the energy, transport and industry space, is committed to an ambitious 
> goal of ensuring that 100% of hydrogen fuel used in different modes of 
> transportation is decarbonised by 2030. We are therefore calling on 
> governments to build a global alliance that will create the necessary 
> regulatory frameworks to help make this commitment a reality. Transport may 
> be our first target, but with right level of support we will see positive 
> effects across many sectors. We believe hydrogen can play a key role in the 
> clean energy transition and we are ready to work together with governments to 
> help create the right technical, financial and legislative environment that 
> will enable decarbonised hydrogen to scale up.”
> 
> Through this commitment to the 2030 goal, hydrogen for transportation can 
> achieve full decarbonization 15 years ahead of the SB 100 mandate of 100% 
> carbon-free electricity by 2045.  Attainment of the stated goal of 100% 
> carbon-free hydrogen fuel by 2030 will maintain the position of hydrogen fuel 
> cell electric drive as the lowest-carbon alternative among electric drive 
> solutions.  
> The hydrogen industry is committed to helping California dramatically reduce 
> emissions despite increasing transportation demand by providing a clean fuel 
> that has proven itself in both on- and off-road applications and is emerging 
> as an important alternative to diesel in marine, rail and port applications.
>  
> 
> - Mark
> 
> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)