Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
The Electric Car
Options
Comments
-
lpg isn't really a solution to fossil fuels tho, you are still beholden to the same cartels.
biodiesels environmental impact is mostly based on where the stock feed for refinement comes from, if you are recovering oil from some other process then its a lot more green than growing a plant specifically for oil.
another interesting conspiracy just occured to me
why did the US legislate that engine manufacturers had to reduce the ammount of Nox produced by diesel engines burning high sulphur diesel rather than mandate that oil companies in the US reduce the amount of sulpher in their diesel in line with the rest of the world0 -
Tzar Chasm wrote: »lpg isn't really a solution to fossil fuels tho, you are still beholden to the same cartels.
biodiesels environmental impact is mostly based on where the stock feed for refinement comes from, if you are recovering oil from some other process then its a lot more green than growing a plant specifically for oil.
LPG isn't a solution to fossil fuels but because it's a by-product in the production of petrol and diesel if there were no use for it it would simply be wasted by burning it, so in a way it makes perfect sense to use it and it's much cleaner than diesel.
There are still emissions from the production of bio fuels and in the burning of bio fuels, though much cleaner than diesel.Tzar Chasm wrote: »another interesting conspiracy just occured to me
why did the US legislate that engine manufacturers had to reduce the ammount of Nox produced by diesel engines burning high sulphur diesel rather than mandate that oil companies in the US reduce the amount of sulpher in their diesel in line with the rest of the world
afaik they have reduced the sulphur content of diesel fuels, but the U.S have far stricter emissions regulations regarding diesel emissions than Europe even with low sulphur diesel and diesel exhaust has to be treated with chemicals, I think Mercedes call it ad blue ? But imo it just further adds to the complexity of modern diesel engines.0 -
Ultra Low Sulphur Diesel must be 'available' but the standards vary between the US &EU, we want 3-5 ppm they allow 15ppm
but low sulphur diesel is the norm, and its there that the difference is obvious, our standard is 50ppm and their LOW Sulphur standard is 500ppm.0 -
From Wiki
Ultra-low-sulfur diesel fuel was proposed by EPA as a new standard for the sulfur content in on-road diesel fuel sold in the United States since October 15, 2006, except for rural Alaska who transferred in 2010. California has required it since September 1, 2006. This new regulation applies to all diesel fuel, diesel fuel additives and distillate fuels blended with diesel for on-road use, such as kerosene, however, it does not yet apply to railroad locomotives, marine, or off road uses. Since December 1, 2010, all highway diesel fuel have been ULSD. Non-road diesel fuel was required to move to 500 ppm sulfur in 2007, and further to ULSD in 2010. Railroad locomotive and marine diesel fuel also moved to 500 ppm sulfur in 2007, and will change to ULSD in 2012. There are exemptions for small refiners of non-road, locomotive and marine diesel fuel that allow for 500 ppm diesel to remain in the system until 2014. After December 1, 2014 all highway, non-road, locomotive and marine diesel fuel produced and imported will be ULSD. [End Quote]
So ULSD is what they must use now 15ppm max.0 -
I hope its ok to post in this thread. It seemed like i would just be creating a duplicate by starting a new one.
I am a big believer in the theory that the ECar is being held back. Recently I thought they had failed with tesla etc. Maybe they have.
There is simply too much money at stake. Today though, the ESB released charging prices soon to be implemented in an email to the ECar owners currently registered.
17quid per month flat fee + 30c PER MINUTE.
This charge is HUGE. Its not even based on power consumed.
The ridiculous consequence of this is that long journeys, that require several recharges. Basically any cross country driving will now cost 9quid per charge. So in some cases it will be more than petrol, and in most cases, not significantly cheaper.
I was very surprised by this. I was wondering if some forces at play would try stop it from being mass adopted. It looks like that first stroke of the pen to tackle it has been struck. All a force has to do is to make it less attractive price wise to run the car.. and whoosh.. all the benefits that would encourage mass adoption is gone.
I think it a foolish move on ESB part. They could have the entire car market fuelling as their customer.. Yet.. ruin this emerging market.
So yes, I do think there are forces at play that are this very day actively trying to stop the ECar adoption.0 -
Advertisement
-
No please post in this thread about the ESB billing for charging. No point having two threads going about it.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057515691&page=130 -
Cookie_Monster wrote: »Time to charge car 6-10 hours
Time to fill with petrol 2 mins
Range of elec maybe 100-150km
Range of petrol car 600km+
charge required every day, if not more often. Petrol once a week or less.
Not practical at all...
LOL. I have been running a Zoe for a.most a year now. Best transport purchase I ever made (apart from my awesome motorcycle) and highly practical. Full charge at home is under 3 hours. That is from an almost flat battery. I have a 30amp, 7kW charger, which I got installed for free. Driving conservatively I can get the best part of 160k on a single charge, my consumption averages about 4.6 miles per kWH. I think I pay about 12p per kWH.
I live in the UK and there is a company called Ecotricity. They have a little scheme call the electric highway. This is a network of rapid chargers, in most motorway service stations. This will charge a Zoe from 0 to 80% in about 25 minutes. This network is 100% free to use.
I live in Buckingham and have driven the Zoe to Edinburgh and back. Yeah, I have to stop pretty frequently, but it was actually an really enjoyable and stress free way to drive, it also cost me nothing as I went from free rapid charger to free rapid charger.
The practicality, or otherwise, of EVs is dependent on infrastructure. Yes, the cars tech is important, the longer the range the less reliable they are on infrastructure, but depending on where you live they are really practice. As a family we are saving a fortune with the electric car, but we have reasonably decent infrastructure in the UK. That said, if you are running the car as a little city/town run around then infrastructure is less important. If you aren't making long journeys then daily charging may not be necessary. Our other car is a grand voyager, we have 4 kids. Most of our journeys are short and don't need 7 seats, so the Zoe is perfect. We went from filling the grand voyager every week, best part of £100 at one point, to now filling it maybe once a month.
Did anyone see "Building Cars Live" a couple of weeks ago? In Norway last year 18% of new cars sold last year were electric. And that number is expected to rise.
To reword a favourite saying of mine to. Are it more suitable for this; never put down to conspiracy what can be adequately explained by government incompetence.
MrP0 -
By my calculations a €17 flat fee is more like 0.02c an hour.manonboard wrote: »There is simply too much money at stake. Today though, the ESB released charging prices soon to be implemented in an email to the ECar owners currently registered.
17quid per month flat fee + 30c PER MINUTE.
This is the real reason electric cars haven't taken off yet. They don't have the range to compete with the combustion engine. That's changing and the tables could turn within the next 5 years making electric viable or preferable.The ridiculous consequence of this is that long journeys, that require several recharges.0 -
I think the next car from Tesla, not the model x but the one after, will help turn those tables, but infrastructure is still a major issue.This is the real reason electric cars haven't taken off yet. They don't have the range to compete with the combustion engine. That's changing and the tables could turn within the next 5 years making electric viable or preferable.
I read years ago that Finland were considering a system where they had a nationwide network of charging stations. Fairly standard so far... The difference was, when you arrived you did not plug in, you parked in the bay, your battery was dropped out and taken off to be charged and a fully charged battery was installed. All automatic and faster than filling a car with fuel. Not sure what happened with that system, perhaps there is a conspiracy there. A system like that would, I think, have really helped EVs to kick off.
MrP0 -
I heard of an Israeli company doing something similar. If patents were a problem it might have scared some folks away. Unless the car makers can agree on a common standard there's no point in anyone going to far down the road of developing the technology, especially when the car manufacturers can decide they want to come up with their own concept.
I'm actually surprised how many of the charging stations there are around the country and in small towns, and I don't think I've ever seen one in use.0 -
Advertisement
-
Have always thought that oil company's are holding back the electric car, but then again, the oil companies are needed to provide electricity to fuel the electric car to some degree.
But who can you trust these days? Like when they say oil is running out. Is it tho, or are they saying that so they can keep prices at a premium for as long as possible?
Hydrogen is the future.0 -
Have always thought that oil company's are holding back the electric car, but then again, the oil companies are needed to provide electricity to fuel the electric car to some degree.
But who can you trust these days? Like when they say oil is running out. Is it tho, or are they saying that so they can keep prices at a premium for as long as possible?
Hydrogen is the future.
We don't use oil to generate electricity ?
There is a decent bit of our electricity coming form wind in Ireland, lots of days 30-40-50% is met by wind. There are days that 3-5% is met from wind but still, seeing 50% being met is really cool to see at times. Even 30% all this is energy not being imported though may as well be because it doesn't make our bills cheaper.
Hydrogen isn't the future at all at least not for passenger cars, it's hugely wasteful to produce, this energy is far better put into batteries.0 -
I don't think either technology has found a workable solution yet. Hydrogen needs a fuel cell to work. I think there are a number of fuel cells in development that could provide safe storage. If they can make it cost effective there's no reason why Hydrogen wouldn't take over.Deleted User wrote: »Hydrogen isn't the future at all at least not for passenger cars, it's hugely wasteful to produce, this energy is far better put into batteries.
The problem with batteries is they can't hold enough of a charge and weigh a ton, There are light weight, high capacity batteries being developed but they're prone to bursting into flames at the moment. But I think a lot of the new fully electric race series are putting serious development into these new types of batteries and are more prepared to live with the dangers.
I think the race to electric is still on when it comes to fuel. The car itself is ready. Electric cars are better in every way bar fuel capacity. They're faster, cheaper to run and have way better handling. They will leave the combustion engine for dust once the fuel issue is sorted.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »We don't use oil to generate electricity ?
Oil and Gas powerplants, coal powerplants, and in a number of EVs they use gas-turbines or standard 4-stroke engines to power the electric drivetrain (Chevy Volt).0 -
I don't think either technology has found a workable solution yet. Hydrogen needs a fuel cell to work. I think there are a number of fuel cells in development that could provide safe storage. If they can make it cost effective there's no reason why Hydrogen wouldn't take over.
The problem with batteries is they can't hold enough of a charge and weigh a ton, There are light weight, high capacity batteries being developed but they're prone to bursting into flames at the moment. But I think a lot of the new fully electric race series are putting serious development into these new types of batteries and are more prepared to live with the dangers.
I think the race to electric is still on when it comes to fuel. The car itself is ready. Electric cars are better in every way bar fuel capacity. They're faster, cheaper to run and have way better handling. They will leave the combustion engine for dust once the fuel issue is sorted.
There's far less chance of an EV battery bursting to flames than a tank full of highly combustible petrol !
Just imagine the potential of a large explosion if there were a tiny leak in a highly pressurised hydrogen tank ?
The Nissan leaf battery can not burst into flames , at most it it will just smoke.
The Model S can but it's one of the safest cars ever built and no one has been killed in one yet despite some serious crashes and flames.
We have an electrical network already and granted current EV range is limited but the batteries are good enough today, the Leaf II 60 kwh battery will provide 200-240 miles and I think most people will be happy apart from the usual EV bashers.
In just over 2 years affordable electrics will be more than good enough and most likely charge twice as fast, still not fast enough as ICE which will always upset some but I still can't see most people flocking to Ev until car manufacturers are forced to give up outdated diesel tech in Europe. Until this especially in Ireland, Diesel will remain King while our backward Government keep promoting it as Earth saving technology.0 -
Tell that to e-cig users who have had batteries explode in their pockets. Never had that happen with a lighter.0
-
Tell that to e-cig users who have had batteries explode in their pockets. Never had that happen with a lighter.
Major differences in the batteries.
There have been 0 reports of Nissan leaf battery fires, Renault Zoe, Fluence, BMW I3, VW E-Golf.
Only one in mass production is the Model S that hit a piece of steel at high speed and another that went off the road at high speeds, no injurues or deaths.
And again, the Nissan Leaf battery can not catch fire !0 -
That's current generation batteries, basically the same technology that's in your laptop. Those batteries won't get electric into the mainstream though, they just weigh to much and don't produce enough power to make an electric car something most people could live with. The current batch of electrics only make sense if you've got a short commute, or you live in a city.Deleted User wrote: »There's far less chance of an EV battery bursting to flames than a tank full of highly combustible petrol
Tesla had to innovate to come up with a battery pack that could power their Model S, it was a smart way of managing the batteries to extend the life out to ten years. Ten years is twice what you'd really expect to get out any battery. They have a shelf life don't forget. Tesla subsequently released the patents to help move electric cars along. But the system is really squeezing a stone at this point the technology is at it's limits.
The next generation of batteries are something like a fifth the weight and produce more power. The batteries work great but over heat easily, that's the only thing holding them back from the consumer market, but expect to see them pop up in electric race cars over the next few years.
These two videos briefly talk about the upcoming battery tech. Overheating in the Drayson video and weight in the Mercedes video.
They won't be using a pressurized tank, they're developing fuel cells that will release the hydrogen from a chemical compound. So it would be safe.Just imagine the potential of a large explosion if there were a tiny leak in a highly pressurised hydrogen tank ?
Diesel engines have been at the forefront of engine advances for the past few years. I prefer a HDi engine now. Loads of torque where you need it, perfect for Irish roads. Petrol cars I've tried lately seem dead next to a tiny diesel engine. I know diesel is a lot more toxic than people realize but it's super efficient and modern turbo charged engines are the workhorses of the modern world. I've seen the little 1.6 HDi in the berlingo I'm driving in so many cars, from people carriers to Volvo saloons, and it's incredible what that engine can do.but I still can't see most people flocking to Ev until car manufacturers are forced to give up outdated diesel tech in Europe. Until this especially in Ireland, Diesel will remain King while our backward Government keep promoting it as Earth saving technology.0 -
That's current generation batteries, basically the same technology that's in your laptop. Those batteries won't get electric into the mainstream though, they just weigh to much and don't produce enough power to make an electric car something most people could live with. The current batch of electrics only make sense if you've got a short commute, or you live in a city.
The leaf battery, I3, and E,Golf, And Zoe are far from laptop battery cells. Event he Tesla is well beyond laptop cells now.
Battery tech today is good enough , but the majority of people lack the interest.Tesla had to innovate to come up with a battery pack that could power their Model S, it was a smart way of managing the batteries to extend the life out to ten years. Ten years is twice what you'd really expect to get out any battery. They have a shelf life don't forget. Tesla subsequently released the patents to help move electric cars along. But the system is really squeezing a stone at this point the technology is at it's limits.
Telsa's batteries will last well beyond 10 years, the original model S prototype has over 350,000 miles and still more than usable.The next generation of batteries are something like a fifth the weight and produce more power. The batteries work great but over heat easily, that's the only thing holding them back from the consumer market, but expect to see them pop up in electric race cars over the next few years.
Unfortunately for now the next gen batteries Lithium air are a long way off.
Leaf Ii will hahve 60 kwh option and probably 100 Kw charging, this ability to recharge a car in 5 mins is over rated. Charge 200 miles from home, charge 170 miles in 30 mins over lunch.They won't be using a pressurized tank, they're developing fuel cells that will release the hydrogen from a chemical compound. So it would be safe.
Even if true the immense problem of inefficiency can't be solved unless using Nuclear, but what's the point ? all for 5 min refuelling ? and Nuclear can't even solve the inefficiency but at least it's a 0 emissions source of fuel that is abundant.
Electric cars are much faster and more powerful than a fuel cell for now at least.Diesel engines have been at the forefront of engine advances for the past few years. I prefer a HDi engine now. Loads of torque where you need it, perfect for Irish roads. Petrol cars I've tried lately seem dead next to a tiny diesel engine. I know diesel is a lot more toxic than people realize but it's super efficient and modern turbo charged engines are the workhorses of the modern world. I've seen the little 1.6 HDi in the berlingo I'm driving in so many cars, from people carriers to Volvo saloons, and it's incredible what that engine can do.
Diesels have reached the limit of development, they can only succeed into the future with Governmental support and promotion like our own Government continues to promote. And the E.U continues to promote them and will even after the emissions scandal from VW.
Car makers are pressing E.U legislators to allow them increase emissions to above today's standards meaning diesel has reached the end.
The 1.6 HDI is absolutely nothing compared to the electric motor of the Leaf and it;s far less refined, like a tractor in comparison.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »Major differences in the batteries.
There have been 0 reports of Nissan leaf battery fires, Renault Zoe, Fluence, BMW I3, VW E-Golf.
Only one in mass production is the Model S that hit a piece of steel at high speed and another that went off the road at high speeds, no injurues or deaths.
And again, the Nissan Leaf battery can not catch fire !
And the Dreamliner 787 battery issues? It's kinda weak to argue the reliability of products that, really, are incredibly new. Laptop batteries for instance, they don't fail often, but they fail.
You also have to consider there are way more laptops and e-cigs than Leafs. The actual boom-boom rate of e-cig batteries (or that battery type in general) could be for wild conjectural example, .0003%. You'd have to statistically build a hell of a lot of cars before you saw one blow, but if it did, someone would be dying. Same thing for google's driverless cars: (~)100% pointless to say it has 0% fatalities until there are 10 million of them on the road.0 -
Advertisement
-
There's actually a review of the Toyota hydrogen fuel cell car in this month's top gear mag. (not sure if it's on general release just yet though the list price is there, a shade under 40k sterling)
It's not the prettiest of saloons but the interior is quite nice imo, high grade leather and quite a tasty centre console.
Tester was generally complimentary overall but his biggest gripe was the 'old bugbear, the infrastructure simply isn't there yet. But it's telling that Toyota are releasing it, might be an indication of the path they are looking at taking, they've obviously spent a packet in r and d to take it this far, unlikely to abandon it in a hurry.
I also remember James may testing a Honda fuel cell saloon in california on the show a few years back, and recall reading somewhere that california has a pretty decent hydrogen infrastructure in place/ progressing nicely now.
I can see fuel cell being the answer eventually over ev's that need charging as they currently do, possibly sooner than we know it.
Edit:it's called mirai, costs 66k sterling, polymer electrolyte fuel cell stack, 152bhp,247ftlb.range of about 340 miles on 5kg of hydrogen. Not shabby tbh though must noted there are only 3 stations in the UK that can deliver the hydrogen at the 700bar required. Three more due early '16. 16 by the end of the year. Germany are European leaders with currently 50 by 2016 with 400 planned by 2023. (source:top gear mag)
So obviously the infrastructure is looooonnnngggg way of practical so far but it'll be interesting to see how the German market adopts the technology in coming years.0 -
And the Dreamliner 787 battery issues? It's kinda weak to argue the reliability of products that, really, are incredibly new. Laptop batteries for instance, they don't fail often, but they fail.
You also have to consider there are way more laptops and e-cigs than Leafs. The actual boom-boom rate of e-cig batteries (or that battery type in general) could be for wild conjectural example, .0003%. You'd have to statistically build a hell of a lot of cars before you saw one blow, but if it did, someone would be dying. Same thing for google's driverless cars: (~)100%
pointless to say it has 0% fatalities until there are 10 million of them on the road.
But statistically maybe more lives would be saved than lost by going the EV route over diesel. Despite the odd fatality due to a battery going "boom-boom"
Maybe you know the figures??0 -
shedweller wrote: »But statistically maybe more lives would be saved than lost by going the EV route over diesel. Despite the odd fatality due to a battery going "boom-boom"
Maybe you know the figures??
I don't, but http://car-accidents.com/car-fire-crash-burn.html
Fair point, I just don't want anyone (not you per se) to overexaggerate any new technology's safety record. Just from an engineering perspective: overconfidence in new tech always brings about bad consequences. GM ignition, Takata airbags, Toyota accelerator runoff, I could list plenty more; all instances where laziness allowed for preventable failures to occur, something that can be further compounded in.0 -
emigrate2012 wrote: »There's actually a review of the Toyota hydrogen fuel cell car in this month's top gear mag. (not sure if it's on general release just yet though the list price is there, a shade under 40k sterling)
It's not the prettiest of saloons but the interior is quite nice imo, high grade leather and quite a tasty centre console.
Tester was generally complimentary overall but his biggest gripe was the 'old bugbear, the infrastructure simply isn't there yet. But it's telling that Toyota are releasing it, might be an indication of the path they are looking at taking, they've obviously spent a packet in r and d to take it this far, unlikely to abandon it in a hurry.
I also remember James may testing a Honda fuel cell saloon in california on the show a few years back, and recall reading somewhere that california has a pretty decent hydrogen infrastructure in place/ progressing nicely now.
I can see fuel cell being the answer eventually over ev's that need charging as they currently do, possibly sooner than we know it.
Edit:it's called mirai, costs 66k sterling, polymer electrolyte fuel cell stack, 152bhp,247ftlb.range of about 340 miles on 5kg of hydrogen. Not shabby tbh though must noted there are only 3 stations in the UK that can deliver the hydrogen at the 700bar required. Three more due early '16. 16 by the end of the year. Germany are European leaders with currently 50 by 2016 with 400 planned by 2023. (source:top gear mag)
So obviously the infrastructure is looooonnnngggg way of practical so far but it'll be interesting to see how the German market adopts the technology in coming years.
.0 -
And the Dreamliner 787 battery issues? It's kinda weak to argue the reliability of products that, really, are incredibly new. Laptop batteries for instance, they don't fail often, but they fail.
You also have to consider there are way more laptops and e-cigs than Leafs. The actual boom-boom rate of e-cig batteries (or that battery type in general) could be for wild conjectural example, .0003%. You'd have to statistically build a hell of a lot of cars before you saw one blow, but if it did, someone would be dying. Same thing for google's driverless cars: (~)100% pointless to say it has 0% fatalities until there are 10 million of them on the road.
Dreamliner used completely different batteries to the Leaf.
I don't think I made it clear enough, the leaf's battery by the nature of it's chemistry, can not catch fire as with most mass produced electric cars with the exception of the Tesla.
Leaf battery cells are vastly different to laptop cells.0 -
emigrate2012 wrote: »There's actually a review of the Toyota hydrogen fuel cell car in this month's top gear mag. (not sure if it's on general release just yet though the list price is there, a shade under 40k sterling)
It's not the prettiest of saloons but the interior is quite nice imo, high grade leather and quite a tasty centre console.
Tester was generally complimentary overall but his biggest gripe was the 'old bugbear, the infrastructure simply isn't there yet. But it's telling that Toyota are releasing it, might be an indication of the path they are looking at taking, they've obviously spent a packet in r and d to take it this far, unlikely to abandon it in a hurry.
I also remember James may testing a Honda fuel cell saloon in california on the show a few years back, and recall reading somewhere that california has a pretty decent hydrogen infrastructure in place/ progressing nicely now.
I can see fuel cell being the answer eventually over ev's that need charging as they currently do, possibly sooner than we know it.
Edit:it's called mirai, costs 66k sterling, polymer electrolyte fuel cell stack, 152bhp,247ftlb.range of about 340 miles on 5kg of hydrogen. Not shabby tbh though must noted there are only 3 stations in the UK that can deliver the hydrogen at the 700bar required. Three more due early '16. 16 by the end of the year. Germany are European leaders with currently 50 by 2016 with 400 planned by 2023. (source:top gear mag)
So obviously the infrastructure is looooonnnngggg way of practical so far but it'll be interesting to see how the German market adopts the technology in coming years.
http://reneweconomy.com.au/2015/toyota-vs-tesla-can-hydrogen-fuel-cell-vehicles-compete-with-evs-60374
Why do people want to pay the same for hydrogen or more for 400-500 Kms when 320-250 kms electrics will be here in as little as 2.5 years ? Why give all those companies control like the oil industry ?
You're going to pay a high price for that ability to refill in 5 mins, where as filling in 30 mins is to me much less of a hassle by being able to drive the first 340 kms on my own cheap electricity.
Most hydrogen is made from gas, converted very inefficiently into another gas and then inefficiently burned in a fuel cell ? that sounds mad to me !
Be far better to run cars on LPG.
I'd like to have the option to charge the Leaf on Solar or wind or both.0 -
I think it's the better option long term than battery only. Sure, battery life will increase (likely greatly in the next few short years) but even so recycling them safely and an environmentally friendly way may cause problems.
Look at the Mexicans taking on the job of recycling American lead acid battery's (it's a fcukin messy unsafe procedure in most case's) most developed nations won't want the hassle, farming the job out to less developed nations, where it's cheaper and there's less oversight (or none) and not wouldn't be environmentally safe.
But outta sight, outta mind.
Also, battery only ev's (in terms of global co2 reduction, which really is the end issue) really need to be charged from infrastructure that is based on over 50% renewable sources (wind, solar, wave, even nuclear) to meet the goal of meaningful co2 reduction.
That said , I've no idea what expected life of a fuel cell is or will be but overall I'd imagine, with the right infrastructure and widespread adoption of the format, the overall reductions in co2 levels would be greater.
(BTW, I'm just a casual observer on this issue and am open to correction from those more knowledgeable on the matter.)0 -
[Deleted User] wrote: »
Most hydrogen is made from gas, converted very inefficiently into another gas and then inefficiently burned in a fuel cell ? that sounds mad to me !
Currently yes. Most hydrogen gas production is from fossil fuels. But they are constantly improving other methods such as biomass gasification and electrolysis of water.
Still early days but I think we will see more from it down the line.0 -
emigrate2012 wrote: »I think it's the better option long term than battery only. Sure, battery life will increase (likely greatly in the next few short years) but even so recycling them safely and an environmentally friendly way may cause problems.
Look at the Mexicans taking on the job of recycling American lead acid battery's (it's a fcukin messy unsafe procedure in most case's) most developed nations won't want the hassle, farming the job out to less developed nations, where it's cheaper and there's less oversight (or none) and not wouldn't be environmentally safe.
But outta sight, outta mind.
Also, battery only ev's (in terms of global co2 reduction, which really is the end issue) really need to be charged from infrastructure that is based on over 50% renewable sources (wind, solar, wave, even nuclear) to meet the goal of meaningful co2 reduction.
That said , I've no idea what expected life of a fuel cell is or will be but overall I'd imagine, with the right infrastructure and widespread adoption of the format, the overall reductions in co2 levels would be greater.
(BTW, I'm just a casual observer on this issue and am open to correction from those more knowledgeable on the matter.)
You're still missing the fundamental issue with hydrogen, that is it's horrible inefficiency, emissions are much higher than using already generated electricity and in Ireland more and more of our energy is coming from wind.
Then there is the inefficiency of the fuel cell itself.
Today 51 % of our energy is coming form wind ! That is, more coming from wind than any other source of energy. Granted there are a lot of days we see 5% wind but seeing 51% coming from wind is hugely impressive any day !
http://smartgriddashboard.eirgrid.com/#all
Hydrogen will not offer anything for the average motorist and it will mean expensive refuelling compared to electricity which I am greatly opposed to, most people will be happy with 200 -240 miles range recharging from their own "fuel station" at home charging on ever increasing amounts of green energy ! The fast chargers take cars of the rest for the odd few times 200-240 miles isn't enough.
When batteries are no longer of use in an Ev they will live on in storage applications for many more years, by this time there should be a far better recycling program.0 -
Advertisement
-
Currently yes. Most hydrogen gas production is from fossil fuels. But they are constantly improving other methods such as biomass gasification and electrolysis of water.
Still early days but I think we will see more from it down the line.
I'm sure we'll see hydrogen for some commercial applications but for the average
motorist it offers nothing other than faster refuelling but the refuelling can be done over night when they're asleep or in the future it's quiet possible DC chargers will become much cheaper so charging a 60 Kwh battery could take just 2-3 hrs but for the majority this won't be necessary because the range will be charged over a few days.
Hydrogen production may get greener but why waste so much energy when it can be much more efficiently put into batteries. ?0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement