Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > Fossil Fuel Free
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 02-18-2016, 02:21 AM   #11 (permalink)
Dreamer
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 350
Thanks: 95
Thanked 210 Times in 150 Posts
Yes, lets all buy Hydrogen.
Invest in a country spanning distribution network.
Not just adding charging points like for electricity but a whole new infrastructure.
New trucks that can transport the high pressures that hydrogen requires.
New storage tanks at the petrol stations.
New refineries to create the hydrogen in the vast quantities required.
Then we get to drive around with flammable gas under pressures that would make superman cry.
And accept the "short term" usage of fossil fuels to create the hydrogen.
All so that the oil industry can keep selling fossil fuels.

If people are willing to expend that sort of money on an infrastructure to distribute an inefficient fuel source then why not just bite the bullet and put in the under road charging points. They might not be efficient but at least once done nobody would need to refuel a vehicle, ever. Carrying the fuel for your entire trip would be a thing of the past. No flammable fuel transporting either, not by the infrastructure or the end user.

The under road chargers wouldn't have to be under every road just major roads. For city areas the cars could use their batteries. The under road chargers would be for those 5% of trips that the average person makes that exceed the range of an all electric vehicle.
Having batteries would also keep you going when sections of roads have faults or need road works so that you aren't left stranded.
Imagine driving a 1000 mile trip without refuelling once and arriving with a fully charged set of batteries.
Oh and once you are getting your fuel as you go you no longer have to be scared of the accelerator pedal. All the high horsepower enthusiasts can have their overpowered electric cars without reducing their range to impractical levels.

So if we are talking about building an infrastructure why not build something that suits the needs of the users, rather than just copy the existing fossil fuel model.

I go to the fuel station because i have to not because i want to.

  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Astro For This Useful Post:
NeilBlanchard (02-19-2016), thingstodo (02-18-2016)
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 02-18-2016, 04:56 AM   #12 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 907
Thanks: 194
Thanked 320 Times in 225 Posts
Your post ignores current and near term advances.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Astro View Post
Yes, lets all buy Hydrogen.
Invest in a country spanning distribution network.
Not just adding charging points like for electricity but a whole new infrastructure.
New trucks that can transport the high pressures that hydrogen requires.
New storage tanks at the petrol stations.
New refineries to create the hydrogen in the vast quantities required.
Then we get to drive around with flammable gas under pressures that would make superman cry.
And accept the "short term" usage of fossil fuels to create the hydrogen.
All so that the oil industry can keep selling fossil fuels.

If people are willing to expend that sort of money on an infrastructure to distribute an inefficient fuel source then why not just bite the bullet and put in the under road charging points. They might not be efficient but at least once done nobody would need to refuel a vehicle, ever. Carrying the fuel for your entire trip would be a thing of the past. No flammable fuel transporting either, not by the infrastructure or the end user.

The under road chargers wouldn't have to be under every road just major roads. For city areas the cars could use their batteries. The under road chargers would be for those 5% of trips that the average person makes that exceed the range of an all electric vehicle.
Having batteries would also keep you going when sections of roads have faults or need road works so that you aren't left stranded.
Imagine driving a 1000 mile trip without refuelling once and arriving with a fully charged set of batteries.
Oh and once you are getting your fuel as you go you no longer have to be scared of the accelerator pedal. All the high horsepower enthusiasts can have their overpowered electric cars without reducing their range to impractical levels.

So if we are talking about building an infrastructure why not build something that suits the needs of the users, rather than just copy the existing fossil fuel model.

I go to the fuel station because i have to not because i want to.
Metal hydride storage and chemical conversion storage schemes could make low pressure transport the norm for hydrogen. No need for cryogenic liquid or high pressure gasses. Your idea of building induction charging into the roadways will be considerably more expensive and limiting than a current fuel station dispensing hydrogen as a side fuel. Think about it, if my electric car needs 15 minutes of induction charging to reach a reasonable battery level, at common road speeds, that could be miles upon miles I will need to travel on a "charging road". At common costs of construction, I would rather build out a current fueling station to handle hydrogen dispensing than miles of induction roadway. Also, you ignore the safety aspect of an electromagnetic energy coupling that could see all sorts of machines passing over it or becoming stranded on the charging lane. This is something that has to be thought through.

As time goes, battery performance has not increased as much as fuel cells have especially in the area of cost. And fuel cell costs are dropping even more quickly as catalyst research is finding common material configurations that displace most if not all of the rare earth metals in current fuel cells. Remember , fuel cell cars are essentially battery powered cars but without the need for a large, expensive pack as the bulk of the energy is stored in the hydrogen. Within a few miles of my beach side condo, here in San Diego are an electric car charging station, a natural gas refueling station and soon a proposed hydrogen station. This is infrastructure happening NOW. I don't need to dig up the roadways and disrupt traffic for a few cars in the starting stages of things.
  Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to RustyLugNut For This Useful Post:
iveyjh (02-18-2016), niky (02-21-2016), pgfpro (02-18-2016)
Old 02-18-2016, 10:40 AM   #13 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Stubby79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Victoria, BC
Posts: 1,296

Firefly EV - '98 Pontiac Firefly EV
90 day: 107.65 mpg (US)

Little Boy Blue - '05 Toyota Echo
90 day: 33.35 mpg (US)

BlueZ - '19 Nissan 370Z Sport
90 day: 17.19 mpg (US)
Thanks: 43
Thanked 384 Times in 288 Posts
If they can make it feasible to run on both...ie plug in battery for city driving, hydrogen cell as an unlimited range extender, all in the same vehicle...why not? I'd have to "gas up" only when going on a trip, once or twice a year.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2016, 11:32 AM   #14 (permalink)
Dreamer
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 350
Thanks: 95
Thanked 210 Times in 150 Posts
Under road charging does sound like a huge undertaking but roads regularly get pulled up for resurfacing or expansion. The main road near my place has had some part of it involved in road works, almost continuously for many years. The charging infrastructure could have been put in many times over with no additional disruption to traffic. Many of these major roads already have high capacity electrical connections installed all down their length. Used for the lighting that shines all night even when the road is empty.
Concerns over non-electric vehicles getting fried as they roll over the charging pads are unfounded. Your electric car would communicate with the charging pad. Negotiating charge parameters. Checking you bank balance etc. Only then would the charge pad activate. Timed to deliver the charge as precisely as possible. Other cars would just be driving over an inert piece of technology.
This sort of communication already occurs for automatic payment of road tolls.

Oh and you wouldn't need 15 minutes of roadway converted to charging. I believe the charging units would only be several meters long and spaced nearly a kilometre apart.
Some sort of super capacitor set up would take a large amount of power in the short time the car was above the charging pad. Then it would deliver it at a lower rate to the electric motor. Enabling the car to travel to the next charging pad and beyond. Any excess or unused power would be used to top up the batteries. So more a pulsed charging rather than the constant charge you would get from a fixed charge point or a domestic power supply.

Oh and i recently watched the Rob Llewellyn video "Electric Cars Are Rubbish. Aren't They?" https://youtu.be/6q7_xN0ilag?t=2607
I know, i know, not the most authoritative information source and it may also have given me a slightly jaded view of hydrogen cars.
I nearly fell off my chair when he said $250000 dollars just for the fuel cell in the Honda Clarity. Improvements in technology may be able to reduce this. Economies of scale will help as well but unless they can reduce the platinum required then it will stall, platinum isn't likely to have a ten fold drop in price.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2016, 01:24 PM   #15 (permalink)
home of the odd vehicles
 
rmay635703's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Somewhere in WI
Posts: 3,299

Silver - '10 Chevy Cobalt XFE
Thanks: 343
Thanked 652 Times in 485 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Astro View Post
inefficient fuel source then why not just bite the bullet and put in the under road charging points. They might not be efficient but at least once done nobody would need to refuel a vehicle, ever.

The under road chargers wouldn't have to be under every road just major roads.
Tesla claimed that electricity could be wirelessly transmitted many miles without the need of tearing up expensive roads, just put a wireless electrical broadcaster every so often
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2016, 04:54 PM   #16 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Saskatoon, canada
Posts: 1,455

ChargE (not yet running) - '92 Mazda MX6 LX
90 day: 33.89 mpg (US)

Ford Prefect - '18 Ford F150 XLT XTR
Thanks: 740
Thanked 534 Times in 429 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RustyLugNut View Post
As time goes, battery performance has not increased as much as fuel cells have especially in the area of cost.
Past performance is not a good indicator of future performance ...

I'm good with any sort of change away from gasoline and diesel. Hydraulic hybrids, solar cars, compressed air motors ... even burning diesel to make electricity to charge electric cars is lower emissions than a decent gas engine in a car. Everything is a step in the right direction.

I'd prefer to stop using fossil fuel. But hydrogen cars, as was mentioned, develop the electric drivetrain as well so it benefits electric systems.

And I'd prefer not to have billions spent on new infrastructure - pipelines, fuel storage, electric roads, et al.

If we spread the research dollars around a bit, the lowest cost/greenest/whatever other criteria we come up with .. option will be found.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to thingstodo For This Useful Post:
Astro (02-18-2016)
Old 02-18-2016, 06:19 PM   #17 (permalink)
Dreamer
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 350
Thanks: 95
Thanked 210 Times in 150 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmay635703 View Post
Tesla claimed that electricity could be wirelessly transmitted many miles without the need of tearing up expensive roads, just put a wireless electrical broadcaster every so often
And everybody gets a lovely spikey hairdo for free.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2016, 09:31 PM   #18 (permalink)
EV convert
 
oil pan 4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NewMexico (USA)
Posts: 8,689

Sub - '84 Chevy Diesel Suburban C10
SUV
90 day: 19.5 mpg (US)

camaro - '85 Chevy Camaro Z28

Riot - '03 Kia Rio POS
Team Hyundai
90 day: 30.21 mpg (US)

Bug - '01 VW Beetle GLSturbo
90 day: 26.43 mpg (US)

Sub2500 - '86 GMC Suburban C2500
90 day: 11.95 mpg (US)

Snow flake - '11 Nissan Leaf SL
SUV
90 day: 141.63 mpg (US)
Thanks: 210
Thanked 2,869 Times in 2,244 Posts
Calling hydrogen fossil fuel free is hilarious.
If it were battery powered it would be cheaper to buy, cheaper to refuel, easier to refuel, actually have the possibility of actually being fossil fuel free and most importantly people might be willing to buy it.
__________________
1984 chevy suburban, custom made 6.5L diesel turbocharged with a Garrett T76 and Holset HE351VE, 22:1 compression 13psi of intercooled boost.
1989 firebird mostly stock. Aside from the 6-speed manual trans, corvette gen 5 front brakes, 1LE drive shaft, 4th Gen disc brake fbody rear end.
2011 leaf SL, white, portable 240v CHAdeMO, trailer hitch, new batt as of 2014.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to oil pan 4 For This Useful Post:
Astro (02-18-2016)
Old 02-18-2016, 11:44 PM   #19 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 907
Thanks: 194
Thanked 320 Times in 225 Posts
I am not here to say you are wrong, just that there needs to be a bit more thought.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Astro View Post
Under road charging does sound like a huge undertaking but roads regularly get pulled up for resurfacing or expansion. The main road near my place has had some part of it involved in road works, almost continuously for many years. The charging infrastructure could have been put in many times over with no additional disruption to traffic. Many of these major roads already have high capacity electrical connections installed all down their length. Used for the lighting that shines all night even when the road is empty.
Concerns over non-electric vehicles getting fried as they roll over the charging pads are unfounded. Your electric car would communicate with the charging pad. Negotiating charge parameters. Checking you bank balance etc. Only then would the charge pad activate. Timed to deliver the charge as precisely as possible. Other cars would just be driving over an inert piece of technology.
This sort of communication already occurs for automatic payment of road tolls.

Oh and you wouldn't need 15 minutes of roadway converted to charging. I believe the charging units would only be several meters long and spaced nearly a kilometre apart.
Some sort of super capacitor set up would take a large amount of power in the short time the car was above the charging pad. Then it would deliver it at a lower rate to the electric motor. Enabling the car to travel to the next charging pad and beyond. Any excess or unused power would be used to top up the batteries. So more a pulsed charging rather than the constant charge you would get from a fixed charge point or a domestic power supply.

Oh and i recently watched the Rob Llewellyn video "Electric Cars Are Rubbish. Aren't They?" https://youtu.be/6q7_xN0ilag?t=2607
I know, i know, not the most authoritative information source and it may also have given me a slightly jaded view of hydrogen cars.
I nearly fell off my chair when he said $250000 dollars just for the fuel cell in the Honda Clarity. Improvements in technology may be able to reduce this. Economies of scale will help as well but unless they can reduce the platinum required then it will stall, platinum isn't likely to have a ten fold drop in price.
So which comes first? The road or the cars? I won't buy the car if you don't have a charging road. Who is on the hook to build and maintain the road charging sections? So, you want to put charge pads under roads that need repair. How about the little used roadways that will be decades in the backlog of repairs? How about the long private roads that lead to private homes and businesses?

So you say you can "pulse charge" a capacitor with enough charge for a few kilometers. Have you calculated the energy transfer needed? What will be your current and voltage to provide such an energy pulse? What will be your air gap? What happens if another vehicle is in close proximity to such a pulse? What will be the effect of the resultant electro-magnetic radiation on your vehicle systems? Have you had this discussion with other EEs and Physicists as I have?

What happens when a travel disruption leaves you stranded between charge points for a period of time such that your secondary loads drain your power systems? I'm thinking of the stretch from Baker to Las Vegas in the middle of summer.

And platinum is the least worry for fuel cells. Continued research in material science has molecular configurations that use three orders of magnitude less platinum for the same performance. In the past year, configurations of compounds such as relatively common elements of boron, cobalt and iron are approaching the catalytic performance of platinum. The 250,000 dollar fuel cell stack you quote, is not due to the platinum, but the fact that it's a small run system. Economies of scale are already bringing that price down.

It is not road power versus hydrogen. There really is a place for both. I think future solutions could embrace both to some extent.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2016, 12:06 AM   #20 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 907
Thanks: 194
Thanked 320 Times in 225 Posts
Again, you think of the now, not what is coming.

Quote:
Originally Posted by oil pan 4 View Post
Calling hydrogen fossil fuel free is hilarious.
If it were battery powered it would be cheaper to buy, cheaper to refuel, easier to refuel, actually have the possibility of actually being fossil fuel free and most importantly people might be willing to buy it.
Batteries are limited by chemistry. There are no chemistries on the horizon or in the super computer selection modeling being done in universities that will allow energy density three times that of current lithium batteries. There are hydrogen chemistries that will allow the storage at room temperature and standard pressure of hydrogen produced by any means you care for that already match that triple factor advantage. Or nearly so.

You don't have to thermally decompose fossil natural gas to get hydrogen. As I outlined in other posts, you can use renewable energy from excess sources. For example. If and when solar panels become so low cost and ubiquitous that they are the replacements for roofing material, sunny locations will charge a short range battery electric car and run a house energy needs easily. If there is excess , what can you do with it? You could put it into another battery in your basement, or you could also run an electrolyzer and store the hydrogen for future use. To be exact, you could store it indefinitely. You could store a large enough amount that it may get you through some long spells of cloudy weather. It also could be ported into your Fuel Cell car for longer trips. The density of hydrogen storage is already an advantage. Low pressure, non-cryogenic storage will make it a game changer. Renewables will now have a place to dump excess energy long term.

Battery tech has reached the point of percentage gains for the effort.

Hydrogen is still moving in leaps and bounds when it comes to possibilities.

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com