The truth about hydrogen fuel cell cars
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 19 ส.ค. 2019
- The hydrogen fuel cell car. Companies like Toyota, Hyundai, and Honda are all making hydrogen fuel cell cars, but where are they? And with the popularity of cars like the Tesla Model 3, and even more battery electric vehicles on the way, are hydrogen fuel cells even needed anymore?
▻ Watch The truth about nuclear fusion power - new breakthroughs - • The truth about nuclea...
Full script and citations:
undecidedmf.com/episodes/hydr...
Check out my podcast - Still To Be Determined: bit.ly/stilltbdfm
--------------------
▶ ▶ ▶ ADDITIONAL INFO ◀ ◀ ◀
▻ Support us on Patreon!
/ mattferrell
▻ Tesla and smart home gear I really like:
kit.co/undecidedmf
▻ Undecided Amazon store front (as an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases):
bit.ly/UndecidedAmazon
▻ Great Tesla Accessories
From Abstract Ocean - 15% Discount - Code: "Undecided"
bit.ly/UndecidedAO
▻ Jeda Wireless phone charger:
bit.ly/UndecidedJeda
▻ Get 1,000 miles of free supercharging with a new Tesla:
ts.la/matthew84515
PLEASE NOTE: For the Abstract Ocean discount you may have to click on the "cart" button, then "view bag" to enter the coupon code manually. Be sure to enter "undecided" there if you don't see the discount automatically applied.
All Amazon links are part of their affiliate program.
Enter the Tesla giveaway and win a Tesla Model 3 long range AWD with $5,000 in the trunk. www.prizeo.com/tesla - enter promo code: "undecided" for extra entries. Eligible for US residents only.
Thanks so much for your support!
--------------------
▶ ▶ ▶ GET IN TOUCH ◀ ◀ ◀
▻ X
X.com/mattferrell
▻ Instagram
/ mattferrell
▻ Facebook
/ undecidedmf
▻ Website
undecidedmf.com
--------------------
▻ Audio file(s) provided by Epidemic Sound
bit.ly/UndecidedEpidemic - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
They're just around the corner.
Been hearing that for 20 years.
They said the same about High Definition TV back in the 1950s. So fuel cell technology is looking good for the 2050s.
Just like nuclear fusión, it's always 20 years away.
And the ten hour working week
They exist the problem is the energy efficient ratio many majors discoveries takes years to be fully commercialized:
Radioactivity (discovered ~1900 ,first central nuclear plant ~1950)
Aviation (~19000 ,commercial aviation ~1950)
Computer & internet (~1940, commercialisation 1980)
DNA discovery 1953, first person convicted using DNA 1987)
You have also to consider if hydrogen become performant,more effective,cheaper than conventional cars all the petroleum reserve will lose
A considerable amount of their value !!!!!!!!!
LOL! You think 20 years is a long time do you? Ah, well, to a butterfly a day is an eternity.
I like electric because I plan to install solar w/ enough capacity to run the home and fuel the car. Zero cents/mile (if excluding the initial investment). Long term, it's a total win.
That’s a great path to self sufficiency.
@@UndecidedMF This is what many (or most) people with EV do not only for environmental reasons, but it's far cheaper to charge at home from solar than from grid. For example, SparkEV costs about 75 MPGe$ from grid when gas is $3/gal. But with home solar amortized to 30 years, it's about 225 MPGe$.
My 6.2 KWh solar system, in Ohio, with 4 of my 20 modules facing east and west, and some minor shading produced 7,000kwh, which is enough to drive my Model 3 28,000 miles. I only drive about half that. Seems you aren't the only one with that dream. :)
@@fjalics How much did your solar cost, and does it meet all your home + EV needs? If you divide kWh produced in 20 years by total cost, it'd give you rough $/kWh (it's low but not zero).
Its workable. Buses follow the same route. They dont go fast. Chage them overnight at the depot. One can workout a solution to charge the bus destination and beginning stops where they sit to reset the schedule.
I like the variety in content you’re producing. Thanks Matt
Glad to hear it! And thanks for watching.
I have a Toyota Mirai, and I cannot wait for the lease to end in 5 months. First, the limited number of fueling stations is very frustrating. I cannot drive from San Jose to Santa Barbara in winter without a detour to Harris Ranch in the valley. Very unsatisfactory. Secondly, there has been an explosion at Air Products in Santa Clara, which produces the hydrogen. Supplies have been very limited the last few months. Free fuel is worthless if there is no fuel. The emergency road service is terrible. I tried it once and had to walk home.
But the biggest killer is the radiator. Yes, there is a radiator on the front to cool the fuel cell. There is no protection against stones or other debris. Mine took a hole from gravel or other refuse. The cost of repair was $4,000! Fortunately, my insurance paid for all of this except the deductible. This is clearly a design defect. An anti-ballistic screen would prevent this problem. Instead, Toyota refuses to make any changes and lets the consumer take the risk.
These are great cars to drive, but the negatives clearly outweigh the positives. As a Mirai leaseholder, I cannot recommend this car given my negative experiences.
Are there any other negative experiences with the car you´d like to share? Any positive experiences? I´m curious.
Toyota had the lead for so long... then they doubled down on fuelcells over EVs....
Get an Alfa Romeo Gulia instead. It’s an amazing car!
When the first Gasoline cars hit the road, (Google it) there were no Gas stations either! It will take time to get the infrastructure in place!
Big-Bucks-Businesess are waiting to see which way the wind blows, they don't have a habit of putting Cart before a possible non-existent Horse!
They are in my ass.
The fuel cells Apple is using at it's data centers are not hydrogen fuel cells. They are made by Bloom Energy and are natural gas based fuel cells. They are more efficient than burning natural gas to make electricity but are not carbon free. The advantage they have for data centers is their reliability and they eliminate the need for diesel back up generators. Same for most commercially available hydrogen today... Industrially most hydrogen isn't made via electrolysis but by reforming natural gas into hydrogen and carbon dioxide... Still not a carbon neutral source.
Electrolysis is inherently inefficient because of the minimum voltage necessary to break the hydrogen-oxygen bonds. It only becomes economically viable using renewables when you have a huge peak over supply of electricity. You will get more energy converted to useful work by using the electricity to charge batteries than you will making hydrogen.
Another huge real world problem with hydrogen is the machining tolerances necessary in hydrogen systems. Hydrogen molecules are really small and require really tight fittings and connections so it won't just leak away. Given the beating most vehicles take hydrogen leaks could be a real issue.. Probably not a safety issue because the hydrogen will rise and dissipate quickly. But it would suck to fill your car at night only to find it leak out over night because of a connection that's worked loose from road vibrations. For reference a hydrogen pressure regulator is about 4 times as expensive as an oxygen one..
Great point. It's not simple, it's not for everyone.
But hydrogen is an amazing energy storing device, and we should look at it much more in that way.
For example, all the hype with Powerwalls or grid balancing batteries...they're terrible. No need to waste resources into making batteries with high energy densities that just sit still 24h a day. Using arrays of "stupid batteries" (recycled lead acid car 12v ones for example) or more interestingly using hydrogen generators and fuel cells to store the excess produced by solar for example into large volumes of hydrogen is a much more sensible way to balance out the grid.
Yeah, to electrolyse water and then using the hydrogen in a fuel cell will never be as efficient as charging and discharging a battery, but it's a better solution resource wise. And I guess the whole carbon footprint will be much smaller, given how carbon costly is to make batteries in the first place.
@Trigger Troll funny thing mining trucks are among the 1st ones being converted to electric.. Most large mines are open pit so with electric trucks regenerative braking actually charges the batteries on the way down and the distances the truck travel aren't great... but hey...awesome attempt at trolling.... not...
And of course the other stupidity in this is every other form of electric generation requires big mining... and unlike renewables it's not just for construction it's for the entire life of the facility...
@@GrasponReality You're probably talking about that big electric dump truck, "Elektro Dumper." That does the opposite, it goes up to a mountain empty, gets filled up, drives down heavier under regenerative braking, so it never needs to be charged. It actually makes 200 kWh excess power daily, which needs to be pulled out. www.popularmechanics.com/technology/infrastructure/a28748306/worlds-largest-electric-vehicle-dump-truck/
@Trigger Troll feel free to live in 1980.... the tipping point is in sight... Barely 10 years ago the coal industry was predicting continued growth... how'd that work out?
Companies will make decisions based on cold are tco calculations... already diesel city buses are being displaced at record rates.. The next to go will be urban delivery vans and so it will go.
Aside from the pollution issues of oil it has two other significant issues that can never be dealt with... They are price volatility because of geopolitics and inherent inefficiency.. While fossil fuels may be more energy dense the fact that at best 45% of the energy is converted to motion for diesel and about 25% for gasoline... compared with about 80% for electric. The rest of the energy is wasted as heat... At $3.00 a gallon of gas and paying a top rate for electricity of 25 cents a kwh you need to get 53 miles per gallon to break even versus a Tesla model 3. At the national average rate you need to get 88mpg.
@Trigger Troll the energy density you presented is correct but diesel engine is at best half as efficient as an electric motor. So it gets closer to 30:1. Plus you did mention the difference in elevation that could be used for regen.
Those trucks burn 125 gallons per hour? 12 hours shift that is 8640 Euro in fuel alone per shift. Even oil fields are going solar recently as it is cheaper than burning their own product.
Batteries are getting cheaper every year, they last longer, energy density is getting higher. Maybe arctic won't be the best place to start but I don't think it will take decades for other places.
100M barrels at 55 is 5,5B USD per day. There is a lot of money to be saved.
As I have said before (though I can't remember if I've said it on this channel) it is as stupid to try and refuel electric cars between point A and B as it would have been to try and build a model T that could graze on a pasture. Electric cars need to be fueled where we live, eat, work or shop.
Until hydrogen is produced using solar, wind, hydro or whatever, a hydrogen vehicle is still needs hydrocarbons (oil, gas, coal) to be powered. You don't get something from nothing. Best to just store that energy in batteries instead of pressure vessels and the maze of infrastructure required to contain and transport the stuff
Steve Fink. For most PEV drivers, so does your your car. If you charge after 3pm (really after 1pm because of home charge time) and are grid connected (or at as charge station) then you are using turbine driven power generation. That is likely:
Gas fired, coal fired, hydro or nuclear in that order for North America of likerlyhood. Most PEV customers charge a night.
Grids don't typically store solar power in batteries. It is used in a few minutes of production or just burns off as resistance.
@S Tho but you're using about 3 times less electricity to charge your BEV than would be required to produce the equivalent amount of hydrogen through electrolysis.
Apart from the fact that 99% of the hydrogen available today is not produced via electrolysis, but through gas-reformation from natural gas, which produces lot's of CO2.
Stephan Weinberger hard to say. You don't realize how many newtons of energy at source it takes to charge a device through the remote wiring network. Often the math provided is that of a 12 yr old who just learned algebra. My SuperX needs 60kWh so i only used 60kWh... Hardly. Many, many more times that, and the 60kWh must be there 24x7 for 600 million people in North America whether anyone is using it or not.
Batteries are fine, but chemical batteries rank as the least efficient total energy systems in physics. They are convenient and easy to stick in something, so they get used.
H2 compressed gas is not as efficient in practice as LPG or Nat Gas as a fuel cell, due to the higher concentrations of H on the CH chain in a vessel with the same pressure and temp. H is small and hard to concentrate. Both have the advantage of being bottled during the daylight or at hydro reregulation lakes, and not the problem of making energy when the renewable is not producing.
Mostly this and the batteries is sixty year old Space tech, finally being retrofitted. There is an emotional desire that it work. Just food for thought.
We aren't building cars, so all we can do is buy the best one for the price and purpose from what is being sold. Feet are efficient, but if we went total feet and animal again we'd have to double/triple/... food production and distribution. As well we must again dispose of dead animals on the roads.
Hydrogen doesn't need to be transported. It can be generated on site.
@@stephanweinberger The fuel cell vehicles of the future will probably have a battery for 30-40 mile range and regenerative braking, that is where most driving is done. So most of the miles will be driven using plug-in recharging. The fuel cell will replace a big honking amount and weight of battery for range, and provide a refueling time similar to gasoline. People perceive the time standing still as twice as long as it actually is. Would you want to spend a perceived hour recharging in the desert with a carload of hot cranky kids? I wouldn't.
Those busses from Belgium are still Dutch, only the factory is in Belgium. They produce automated vehicles too. Great vid!
I'll stick with Mr. Fusion, gives me that 1.1 jigawatts to get were I'm going.
Patrick Goodspeed Mr. Fusion really is a nice guy, if only he wasn’t always late.
Don't you mean to get when you are going?
Great Scot!!!
lol
Fuel cell vehicles just aren’t economical. They cost more upfront and their inefficiency which also results in higher costs both make it a hard sell even for many commercial uses. Especially now that electric charging speeds are so high.
Ah, hydrogen fuel cells (HFC) are very efficient and could be more economical, easily more efficient than an ICE and perhaps more than a BEV, whilst if the hydrogen was generated in a large-scale process it could be economical. Right now nobody mass produces them so yes they cost more upfront but that will change when the demand grows. Hydrogen fuel cells are no use in cars because the isn't enough free space to store enough hydrogen, but it seems very likely that HFC will replace diesel engines in long-distance transport - lorries, trains & ships.
That’s part of why I think it makes most sense in large scale scenarios ... even for powering data centers, office buildings, etc.
@@ianmurray250 Hydrogen fuel cells themselves are about 60% efficient but one needs to consider the entire fueling cycle from production of the hydrogen to motive power to the roadway. In the case of hydrogen cars, 77% of the input energy is lost. In the case of electric cars only 30% is lost from source-to-wheels.
Pun Jab I the CO2 footprint of the battery pack is less than people think. It takes less than a year of driving the car for it to become less environmentally harmful than a gas car. Plus, existing battery packs last 400-500k miles before they get repurposed for grid storage. And once done with grid storage, they can be recycled. As of right now, the lower energy efficiency for hydrogen cars makes them less environmentally friendly than electric cars, even after taking the battery into account. In the future, hydrogen cars will become more efficient, but electric car batteries will also last longer and be easier to recycle. If hydrogen gets extraordinarily efficient then the simple fact the car is lighter might make it come out on top, but that won’t be for the foreseeable future.
@Pun Jab I This would not work because of the laws of conservation of energy. The energy required to split water would be greater than the energy derived from the hydrogen produced. It takes 1.3 kWh of energy to produce Hydrogen with an energy content of 1 kWh that would propel a car 100 km. What external source of energy would be used to electrolyse the water?
Battery EVs all the way. I've been driving an EV for over a year now and it is 1000x better than my old gas car in every single way.
@ML F1 No, everyone charges at home.
@ML F1 No. Everyone should be charging at home or at work.
@ML F1 Everybody is in fact charging at home or office. Right now. Myself and everyone I know who bought EV do that. Who can't charge at home won't buy EV as you will worry about where to charge. But even you just have a normal 110v socket, EV works for you right now.
@ML F1 Like he said, yea, apartment dwellers don't/won't buy an EV... for everyone else they charge at home, except on road trips ( and I've now done two 1500 mile road trips in my Tesla X from Florida to Maine ). And that's today. At some point EVs will be common enough that even apartments will start putting in chargers. Also there are plenty of hotels with charging stations, and the Tesla supercharger in Savanna is at the airport. I'm not quite sure why you need to charge at an airport or hospital either. Hell even the CVS down the street from me has a charger, as does the grocery store where we summer in York, Maine, though I have never needed to use them. Now compare that to hydrogen where, as the video showed, the only places to fuel up are in certain parts of CA. Who's the one living in a dream world? Those who can charge at home and drive cross country today, or your you with your hypothetical HFC future?
@ML F1 I'm going to try and construct a rational argument here that you apparently couldn't. It takes 10 times longer to charge a BEV than to fuel an ICE, so to handle the same amount of long distance traffic, you're going to need 10 times as many charging stations along the highway as we currently have gas pumps to make the switch. Yea... that's not ideal. But it isn't entirely outside the realm of possibility either.
Matt! I really really like your videos! You are thorough, precise and have a scope which I can relate to. Just a petty that I can't support your Amazon store from Denmark. Thanks for doing this!
Thanks, Jan! Really appreciate the thought and for watching!
@@UndecidedMF you should tell about the cleanest fuel also - I do on my channel . Its most likely to be our future fuel in my opinion
I want both technologies to thrive!
this is blunt but, you're an idiot
They will.
@@allgoo1990 And motorcycles, scooter, city cars, ... and bigger vehicles as the technology improves. Too bad hydrogen triggers some people so it might not get anywhere.
@@allgoo1990 I meant there are many smear campaigns against it because it's too cheap to make and it seems to be getting cheaper to use too.
Right now fuel cell is still developing. But within a decade it will be a challenging transportation!! Just like lithium batteries against traditional batteries!!
I suspect that fuel cells will only be viable in applications that batteries will never be able to store enough energy to meet. This will probably come down to trans ocean flights and ships. The reason that hydrogen will always lose to battery electric is simple economics. It will always be at least 2x (probably more) to use hydrogen as an energy storage mechanism vs a battery because of the inherent inefficiencies and losses that come down to physics.
To illustrate:
Hydrogen chain: Electricity> split water> compress or cool> transport and storage> Electricity from fuel cell to motor.
Battery chain: Electricity> battery> Electricity to motor.
Each step or conversion listed about is a major cost in terms of energy subtracted from your initial supply of energy. (there's dozens of good breakdowns all over the internet if you really want to get down in the weeds about exact amounts, but suffice it to say that a battery electric vehicle gets about 80% of the initial energy to the wheels whereas a hydrogen vehicle gets about 40% or LESS to the wheels.) This basic fact means that no matter how cheap electricity becomes, it will ALWAYS be significantly cheaper to operate a BEV over a HFCV. This is why personal vehicles will nearly always be BEV's and it's also key to why the heavy trucking industry will also be battery operated over hydrogen. If you give a customer the choice: ship their goods cross country in 24hours at 20 cents per mile or ship their product across country in 48 hours at 10 cents per mile, virtually everyone will choose the cheaper rate. If something is super time sensitive it will go by air in 4 hours.
Physics also plays a role in why hydrogen MAY stand a chance in some select applications. It is expected that lithium batteries will be doubling in energy density over the next few years. There is theoretical room for the density to double once again after that but it will be significantly harder and frankly may never occur outside of a lab. Even if it does, we've now bumped up against the limits of what material science tells us is possible in terms of increasing energy storage in a battery. That's as good as it's going to get. In the case of a trans-ocean plane or ship that's probably not enough since you cannot stop to recharge in the middle of the ocean. In a case such as this the extra cost to use hydrogen may be irrelevant if it's the only viable option.
However, will hydrogen be the only viable option? Probably not. Even in the case such as this cost actually still matters because hydrogen is not just competing with batteries. As one example, there is no reason that ships and planes can't use closed loop synthetic fuels. It's entirely possible now to make artificial fuel using CO2 and energy. It's far easier and safer to handle and it's essentially what engines are burning now and since you're not digging these fuels up and burning them, you're not adding extra CO2 to the atmosphere. The only issue is how cheap can you make it.
Finally, the extreme edge that's being pursued by military's around the world is the eliminate onboard energy storage all together. Space based solar projects are on the extreme fringe now but one of the key components under development is the transmission of power to the ground either through lasers or microwaves. For the military, the reason they pursue this should be obvious. A forward base doesn't need a supply chain, just an antenna. A plane or ship doesn't need to carry a fuel tank AT ALL, just an antenna and it can stay in continuous operation for years, essentially till the motors break...
Fuel cells are pretty much needed for future long range transport, be it long range cars (everything above 600 km), busses, semi trucks and trains. Aircraft and ships will most likely use fuel cells but methanol instead of hydrogen because of storage reasons.
The economie of hydrogen is easily improved by scale of production, even the efficiency of compressing and producing hydrogen would improve by that ;D.
@@mandernachluca3774 A fully loaded Tesla Semi prime mover has a 700 mile demonstrable range.
@@allangibson8494
A hydrogen system with 700 kW power would have triple the range with the same weight.
@@mandernachluca3774 It would be about the same weight. High pressure gas tanks are HEAVY. Cryogenic tanks would be lighter but have much higher evaporative loss rates. Pick your poison....
@@allangibson8494
No, it wouldn't i can show you the calculations if you want.
First the weight of the fuel cell stack, the Toyota Mirai is an about 4 year old car and uses a fuel cells stack (with the humidifier and the the radial compressor) with a specific power of 2 kW/kg. This would give you a 700 kW stack with a total weight of 350 kg, right?
The tank system of the Mirai weights about 92,5 kg (with hydrogen included) and can drive up to 500 km with this system.
Now we divide the weight of the tanks with the about 110 kW and the 500 km to get the weight per power over a range.
Now we can multiply this by the 700 kW and a range of 1000 km.
This gives us a weight of around 1100 kg for the tanks, add to this the 350 kg and you get a total weight of about 1500 kg (more or less, depending on how the safety factor on the tanks is).
Divide the 1000 km by the 1500 kg to get the range per fuel system weight and than multiply this by the battery weight of the Tesla Semi wich probably will be around 5200 kg as the energy density of it's battery will be around 180 kWh/kg.
You will get around 3400 km of range ;D.
Thanks for answering an open question.. also appreciate comments of others.
My biggest battery concern today is their reliance on heavy metals and mining - not an earth friendly solutions over the long haul. This said, way better than living off dead dinosaurs and prehistoric ferns.
Don’t disagree on the heavy metals and mining issue at all, but battery recycling is going to happen. There are a lot of companies racing to capture that market. One is American Manganese that has an environmentally friendly recycling process that can recover almost all of the materials from lithium batteries. Closed loop systems are going to be possible.
Actually dead algae ... Miles Axlerod got it wrong
Butter a better solution than the current oil alternative which has the same issues in terms of raw materials for production + all the ongoing pollution post production.
@@UndecidedMF You don't seem biased at all.
Not to mention the infrastructure for BEV is there already, production lines, power is already flowing through the grid wich can be used.
Fuel cells have none of those benefits, but we need to solve how to produce and store energy when production is high.
Storage is what BEVs are for. 10M BEVs on the grid is enough to power the UK for 3 weeks. V2G and VPP will allow you devote a portion of your battery to this and it will make money for you, you may just have the inconvenience of telling the software when you want it to be 100% charged.
The excess electricity will be used to generate green hydrogen, which can be stored for long periods of time.
The part about fuel cells being better suited for trucks, ships, trains and aircraft is where the emphasis needs to be.
Ship. It’s ship. I don’t think any other mean of transportation can ever really benefit from fuel cells. Trucks: Batteries or powerlines; Train: obviously powerlines; Aircraft: this one is tricky, but probably liquid h2.
www.businessinsider.com/new-worlds-largest-electric-vehicle-is-290-ton-dump-truck-2020-2
@@petergoestohollywood382 aircraft is a problem with weight. To keep H2 liquid you need to keep it cold, and that creates the biggest weight issue. Edit: however, the sites can be powered by this as well as the other vehicles they use on these sites
Battery technology allows you to charge at home most of the time. This is a strong selling point over hydrogen where you will have to go to a filling station just as gasoline car owners need to do now. Once many people in homes understand the convenience of home charging they will not go back.
If the create at home generator of hydrogen-like generators you have now to off-grid then that issue be sorted.
@@WayneJohnsonZastil Not really an option for most people. Only really viable if you have a small business that needs to fuel several vehicles quickly. Most people would be better off getting a bev and living off solar. You can remove the need for external power and fuelling at the same time that way. For fcevs, you would still need external power or you would need even more solar panels.
The biggest downside to bevs is that people have already assumed that fueling up at a station is necessary. They worry about running out of charge or having to wait for hours to recharge on a trip. With very simple planning, these issues don't happen. New drivers will be easier to teach than older ones.
@@WayneJohnsonZastil Most affordable hydrogen generators generate from natural gas, and emit CO2. Having a home generator will actually increase greenhouse gas emissions. Generating hydrogen from water is terribly inefficient, hence the current dominance of BEVs.
@@anthonypelchat I disagree with your analysis on 2 fronts:
1) Many people do not and may never have a place to charge at home, so there will be continual need for them to charge at some sort of charging point. That means a lot more than just simple planning.
2) BEVs only have sufficient range for those whose typical driving is relatively short. For those who live in smaller communities, although the typical daily drive is short enough for BEVs, the number of trips which exceeds even the Tesla Model S range is a large factor. Many people in smaller cities and towns use vehicles like I do: On average, I make approximately 10-15 long trips annually. Trips that currently are 14 hours one way with ICE vehicles become 20 hours with a Tesla, 24 with an iPace or eTron and 28 with a Bolt. That means a one-way trip would now require 2 days rather than one, so the entire trip has 2 days added just for inadequate range. That's 20-30 days of a year wasted, not to mention hotel costs. Having a separate car for local driving is not economically feasible, and probably not ecologically either. The huge majority of my driving is on these long trips, so until I can get 500 miles on a full charge and 80% of that on a charge that takes under 30 minutes, BEVs are not worth it for me. It's a shame, because I would really like to get there, but most of the design seems targeted at the metropolitan suburban market.
Very knowledgeable with your research and information as always. Another great video.
👍 Thanks so much!
I love this way you present videos. It's very engaging and high quality. I hope to see more and hope you will gain more subscribers so you can keep putting out these kind of engaging, educational videos!
👍 Thanks so much! That really means a lot. Thanks for watching.
I will take my chances with a good old fashioned battery fire over hydrogen explosion any day of the week. This tech is not for urban transport vehicles. Maybe this can replace bunker fuel in the open oceans.
we need a few more zeplin explosions shown on screen to put the shits up the maybes waving in the wind
I will take my chances with a good old fashioned gasoline fire over a battery fire or one from hydrogen....
Local FD will just let a EV to burn out. Then not allow the EV to be moved for hours after the fire is out.
You're way safer with a hydrogen fire. Hydrogen fires tend to burn straight up because hydrogen doesn't pool in low places like gasoline vapor does. That's why so many people survived the Hindenburg disaster.
@@LG123ABC
While you all are figguring out which is the "safer" fire, ill just ride my bicycle to work. Maybe I wont be hit by the ICE driver texting about EVs fires, hit by by the EV driver texting about Gasoline fires, etc
You are right, a 1000°C hot fire is much better . . .
Why is hydrogen not used for just energy storage? it seem like it could be used to store exess production from irregular sources like wind and solar.
It is . Large scale hydrogen storage is the easiest way to use hydrogen
@@mddevice2108 I would not call storing hidrogen easy, or producing it cheap.
@@AngelLestat2 That is a terrible idea. Normal pipes and joints will not hold hydrogen properly.
@@aitorbleda8267 agreed. You have to electrolysis, then compress the gas, the steps involved lead to too many energy losses.
That would only be viable if its multi-use. maybe seaports and airports can function as mass energy storage for the grid.
Great stuff as always! Really appreciate the videos
Hi Matt,
Thank you for another great video on an important subject.
Though I've had my eye on the Hyundai Nexo since the first rumours appeared I do agree with you that's it's getting harder to defend the massive price difference compared to BEVs.
Having said that I do think there's some issues you missed in your video, as:
- The US market is one thing, Europe is another, like you mentioned the H-busses of The Nederlands. On top of this you should have mentioned the H-train just deployed in Germany.
- Here in Denmark H isn't produced from natural gas at all!
- You mention the 40 H-stations in California as insufficient, I agree, though here in Denmark (a 10th of the size of California!) we have 10 H-stations and more are being build.
- Lack of charging points for BEVs is also an issue. I'll soon get 115 kms (72 miles) to work, and the same back again, with no opportunity to charge at home, not even granny-cable! (By the way: There's now more charging points in Denmark than petrol stations!)
If battery prices continue to drop it'll probably be the end of consumer H-vehicles, I too think you're right on that one.
Keep up the good work!
There's also this crucial point to factor in: Even if, at some point in the future, hydrogen becomes a much more cost effective option(and you can see how far it will have to go to achieve that), it will still have to compete with, by that time, EVs with massive market penetration, AND well established consumer confidence.
Even if hydrogen is a better option it may still fail - as mentioned in the vid Betamax lost out to inferior quality VHS!
Thanks for the perspective on that Kasper. I do think hydrogen is going to be less of a problem for infrastructure in some areas like you point out. Japan is probably going to be another country with hydrogen easily accessible. Even so, it’s still more expensive up front to buy into and to operate. There will be advancements to make that price drop, but the same is happening for BEVs. I don’t see the gap between H and BEV changing anytime soon. But as I always say to folks, this isn’t a one size fits all situation. For some a hybrid car makes the most sense ... others a BEV ... and with this ... fuel cell. I love that we’re able to have this debate and see different options being tried out and adopted. We have to get off fossil fuels, so I’m all for whatever works.
IMO, I think that hydrogen will end up being used in many applications where diesel is currently, like for example, long haul trucks, farm equipment and other heavy-duty equipment where long run time is needed, whereas battery electric will be used to replace gasoline in applications like cars... but time will tell. If the energy density of batteries increases enough, it could prove my guess to be wrong.
Edit: I really should watch the video first so I don't end up repeating what he said lol.
No way. Batteries will get so much better that they will make hydrogen look like steam power.
Maybe heavy-duty equipment. but Tesla is capable of replacing rail with its blower loops. (Not hyperloop that's the upgrade version) which would also replace long hall trucking
@@lesp315 Apart from battery tech stagnating for more than a decade
@@redReiRei You are an idiot. Check your facts.
@@austinblackburn8095 Are you for real? Just take a little time and check latest news. There is so much going on if comes to new type of batteries that only idiots can think that batteries are done.
Fuel cells on ships is a great Idea they are floating on their fuel.
If the process of turning the water into hydrogen could be done on the ship using a combination of solar and wind even better.
Not anywhere near feasible.
Unfortunately we're a ways out from PV/electrolysis/fuel cell tech that would make on-board hydrogen production cost effective. However, I think it *might* be doable to create fueling stations out in the ocean powered by floating wind and PV.
Thank you for an informative and balanced presentation.
Thank you; overall this was an excellent update. I do have one suggestion. In every video before this one, I've found your word choice to be impeccable. Here, though, I would suggest we never refer to fuel cells or batteries as "generating" energy. (You do this twice in this video.) It takes a generating system, on or off the power grid, to charge a battery or manufacture hydrogen. That is the true point of power generation. Hydrogen fuel cells, like batteries, store and transport energy, but do not generate it.
Fuel cell cars require 3 times as much electricity as battery electric cars. it just does not seem to make a lot of sense to turn electric energy into hydrogen (max 70-80% efficiency) than transport it (hydrogen is very clumsy to transport, pipelines don’t work, low energy density requires lots of trucks...) and than turn it back into electricity (again no more than 70-80% efficiency).
not to mention the losses that occur to compress / store enough hydrogen in containers that actually fit in a car.
just put the electricity directly into the car. for large and heavy things like trains and ships and some agricultural machines with high continuous power requirements it might be the only viable option. for road vehicles I think they already lost as batteries have a huge head start in regards to cost.
True, unless fuel cells become cheaper than battery it is nowhere.
One advantage will be a large battery pack will not be required for fuel cell vehicle.
Fuel Cells always thought of a way to STORE EXCESSIVE Energy. Like In Washington State, most electricity come from Hydro Power Plant and excessive electricity is used to pump water up the dam. Same with Solar, Wind power in middle of nowhere, need a way to store energy.
There are several projects about storing power like using electricity to carry up weights and then when energy is needed, use gravitation force to let's the weight down.
Quite frankly, it takes time and research for more efficient fuel cells, more so than battery. Just like Thorium Nuclear Power Plant and corporations won't be willing to take RISKS, that's all.
Besides that we should use a car, a truck, etc. only when it is actually needed.
We have way more efficient light personal electric and human powered vehicles to move small amount of goods and/or persons
ArthursHD that’s why I don’t even own a car. Here in Hamburg, Germany public transport, a good bike and an occasional rental car (car sharing) is really all you need.
but that’s not the point of this video i would say.
I live in an apartment along with 199 other units. I have underground parking but there are 0 electrical outlets in the parking area. Plug-in electric is not possible unless you plan to sit for 20 to 26 minutes at a charging station before or after work. Also, I live in Canada where the range of the battery is very much affected by the temperature which has a wide range. Also I drive electric vehicles along with hybrid and gasoline for a manufacturer. The range on the electric car changes dramatically again with the use of accessories like AC. I could gain 25 to 30 kilometers by lowering the AC to very low or off.
I cannot buy electric where I live in an apartment which accounts for the majority of the population in most countries. While there may be improvements over time it will be many, many years before plug-in EV are practical and affordable to the masses.
Hydrogen makes more sense but for now, hybrid is the best and cheapest option for most.
@Pun Jab I I believe the Supercharger stations can do it in less than 30 minutes, still.....
A 2Megawatt Electrolyzer costs on it's own 3 million US dollars that require costly maintenance,staff , you then need to add the cost of the land , pumps ,compressors and special big hydrogen tanks , and then you have one hydrogen gas station that can serve up to 200 cars a day that can cost around 4 Million US dollars. Or with the same you could install 4000 charging point that require low maintennance , no staff and safer. Sure both options have pro's and cons . Fuel cell cars are slightly less influenced by AC and heating than EV but still much more than an ICE.
@@MrPikkoz excellent information but since many countries....USA, England for example, need to up their electricity output you will need to add the cost of a nuclear station or windmills or solar fields which are less expensive to build and maintain but are also using up large fields that could be used for growing things.
We could go on and on but my point was that plug in EV is a difficult ask for many, many people because they cannot power up overnight even if the electricity is plentiful. All the people that I've seen promoting the plug-in version don't even mention this issue because they know it is a major drawback to the EV. Hybrid is best for most people until the infrastructures are on a par. Cheers
@@ronknox3376 once graphene is implemented EV / hybrids will be the winner
I remember reading about this stuff ages ago. Great Video !
Thanks for watching!
This is an Excellent video that's been well thought through and delivered in an easy-to-understand manner. Love the price comparison slide on EV, H20 and Gas! Nuan
H20 Fuel Cell technology will clearly establish a Market for large-scale Transport in the Shipping Industry and heavy-duty industrial vehicles for forklifts and mining etc.
I'm on my second fuel cell Mirai. Love it. Don't knock it until you own it.
There are no fueling stations where I live. A BEV can be plugged in at home and refuel as I sleep. which I have to do anyway.
BUT THEY ARE UGLY
Someday, Nuclear Powered Car's! They'll keep Running and Running!
Hahaha good one! Wait, you’re not serious, right? Maybe you should check Ford Nucleon.
@@petergoestohollywood382 or Ford Fusion lol
thank you Matt Ferrell for the information provided is very useful
Great video, IMO as the infrastructure is implemented the costs of HFCVs will come down just like EVs prices have come down over the last few years. You're right it's Beta vs. VHS and I'm betting that the HFCV will eventually win out
I've become enamoured with carbon based capacitors for automotive use. Quick charging, high energy capacity, it seems like the "killer app". Where does this technology stand today ? I'm still not sold on current batt tech longterm.
I also don’t think the current battery technology is the future of transportation. Solid state batteries, capacitors, etc. are all going to play a big role as things continue to evolve. Tesla keeps teasing their big advancements they’re planning on talking about early next year. The future of transportation is absolutely electric, but what supplies that electricity will be changing over time.
A battery large enough that would be able to power a car is more expensive than buying a plane.
Big mistake to use the purchasing habits of government agencies to indicate sound decisions. Government agencies routinely make terrible buying decisions
Time to privatize the military to the highest bidder ;)
of course, if the would know what makes sense they would be engineers and not politicians. so they have to talk to managers of the industry. and managers from shell are happy to talk to them shit
But I hear those $900 coffee cups work great.
Like giving money to solar friken' roadways? ;)
Great video Matt, thanks. I think you are onto something with the larger vehicles and hydrogen. I agree that it doesn't make as much sense for smaller cars. Why use electricity to produce the hydrogen, transport it using some type of fuel, store it, pump it using electricity, then use it to produce electricity in the hydrogen car? Seems silly to spend so much effort. Just take all that electricity to make, transport, pump, store, convert hydrogen and just put it in an EV Here's a video idea - how many miles you'd get for that electricity used throughout the hydrogen process by just putting it in a BEV.
Thanks! And agree 100%. BEVs are cutting out the middle man, which helps to minimize the loss in energy during all of those conversion steps. That is a great idea for a video ... the Real Engineering channel actually did that math to figure all of that out! Worth a watch: th-cam.com/video/f7MzFfuNOtY/w-d-xo.html
They are in use today in some buses in Alameda County, California as a demonstration project. The buses work as well as any other. The U.S. Army is experimenting with them using the Chevy Colorado ZH2. The mistake people make is thinking only in terms of personal vehicles for the general public rather than about where they might have application.
You missed two key points - the most common source of hydrogen is steam reformation of natural gas. Essentially they still use fossil fuels. Secondly, you still need a battery to manage the flow of energy - hydrogen is just another battery, but one that is inefficient, expensive, and dangerous. They add unnecessary complexity.
You don't have to wonder why fossil fuel companies are so keen on hydrogen. - they're specialised around refining, distributing, and selling a dangerous, explosive substance at fixed filling stations. Hydrogen simply stores their existing business model. It's a distraction - bad for consumers and bad for the environment.
That is deliberate. The electrolytic evolution of H2 can be nmade economically viable, IF we stop using Neo-liberal economics, that dumo the 'externalities" of the impacts like Climate change on the public, the planet and the future. Once you integrate the externalities into Cost Benefit Analysis these technologies are simply TOOO expensive.
I’d take a look at Scotland’s pilot project recovering hydrogen from seawater linked to renewable sourced electricity now the project is to be spiralled up greatly one such project using the pioneered project is to be opened in the Mediterranean. I’d point to Germany and a now push for greater infrastructure France UK NZ Australia Japan Netherlands China all driving towards more hydrogen,let’s no forget it releases 8x as much C02 than a comparable EV saves over its lifetime plus my concern and an increasing amount across Europe of the ethics of lithium extraction and habitat destruction. If the US wants to dismiss fuel cells so be it ROW seems to be changing, on a final note the reader mentions Aberdeen well I’m afraid he’s behind the times H2 vans and trucks are about to go on general sale.
The most powerplants uses coal or nuclear to produce the power for a BEV.
Is this better then to use blue H2?
I am happy and proud, that I can feed here in Switzerland my mirai with pure green H2!
By a BEV you never know the real power sources.
Only if you buy and install a own solar plant on your roof, then you know it exactly.
But do not forget to buy and install a big accu for the storage of your own energy.
In the nigth, there is no visible sunligth there.
Or by clouds, snow, rain...
Fuel cells for small vehicles.. not a chance. I'm not holding out because I already have an EV.
BEV costs $5 to Fully Charge on L2 in 4 hours, FCV cost $100 to fill a Tank and if you turn off the car, it could be Awhile for the car to reignite.
@@markplott4820 Your charge lasts for 6 hours, the hydrogen lasts for 6 weeks.
@@JamieM20001996 - Hydrogen likes to BOIL off , as there is NO PERFECT storage vessel. the Expanding gas has to Escape and is VENTED and there is Always ANGEL loss in TRANSPORT and Hydrogen molocule is very Small and it LIKES to Escape from a Vessel ANY way it can.
My car Charge , lasts me 15 days with Daily use.
@@JamieM20001996 - thats a JOKE.
it costs $300 to fuel up a MIRAI and you are losing fuel when the tanks heat up and have to vent .
I have SOLAR on my roof, and home Battery, I can charge for FREE overnight , and leave with a FULL charge every morning.
@@markplott4820 Electrons like to RUN AWAY as they don't like being confined in a state of EXCITEMENT which is why your car self discharges. POWER IS DISAPPEARING!!
Back in the land of reasonable people i'll point out hydrogen has an energy density an order of magnitude greater than the best batteries that will ever be available and leave it there.
Love your videos Matt. All the Tesla stans creates are great but rarely critique Tesla batteries versus other methods as deeply as you do. Keep it up my friend.
why not a battery electric hydrogen fuel cell hybrid? Plug in and charge and the hydrogen fuel as a backup when needed. Both clean and no range anxiety.
I guess some people who argue about this online have already chosen their team.
@@Mallu151 i wouldn't doubt it sadly
Transporting hydrogen on top of gasoline & diesel, this is ridicules! How many more fuel trucks do we need on the roads? It also require more factories to produce it. Electricity is transported by wire, or can be generated anywhere, like solar, water dams, wind mils and etc...
I think, all we need at the moment is a decent breakthrough in battery technology with faster charging and higher capacities.
True. However, one nice item for fcev trucks (not passenger vehicles) is that the station they refuel at can produce its own hydrogen. And fcev trucks can get up to over 1000 miles of range now vs bev trucks that can only get 500-600. Fueling fcev trucks is faster than bev ones and fast charging of bev trucks constantly could possibly cause issues with battery longevity. Replacing those batteries would be very expensive.
That said, I don't see any good reason to have fcev passenger vehicles. Too expensive for barely any benefit. They only have an advantage over bevs for long distance driving or for people who don't have a home or office to charge at. And even those benefits are outdone by current hybrids, which would likely be better for the environment now for passenger vehicles then fcevs.
Yes you are correct. A typical 130 kg hydrogen fuel truck carries enough hydrogen to fuel only 3.7 Class 8 trucks
You don't necessarily need to transport it. You're using 20th-century thinking where crude oil had to be refined and then transported. Hydrogen can be generated on site because all you need to make hydrogen is electricity, water and a place to store it.
@@LG123ABC I would site several issues: a local electrolyser is costly ($3 million USD for a 130 kg unit capable of refueling only 26 FCEV's) and requires some degree of human supervision. They should not be located in populated areas for safety reasons so that increases refueling times due to travel to/from less populated areas. To get better economies of scale the electrolysers need to be bigger (350 kg and up) hence more supervision, safety risk and footprint requirements (all bad).
With the higher costs per kg either way and the need for highly specialised human supervision at multiple sites in a distributed production model, costs would likely be lower for the transportation/dispensing model ($400K per site) as it requires less on-site support. Hydrogen for roadway transportation is lose/lose as it cannot complete with gasoline, diesel or electricity.
I don’t think there’s any breakthrough in battery storage coming any time soon. There’ll be some incremental improvements in lithium ion but they are already getting towards the physic’s limit for lithium ion based chemistries that remain stable. Not sure where solid state batteries are at but I think still a long way from being practical.
It doesn’t make sense for buses or trucks to why would you want your operations & maintenance cost to go up & be government subsidised lol Shanghai all 16000 buses are electric
Cameron Scott With development, cost will go down(just like BEVs). Hydrogen is much, much faster.
Daniel Huffman you will always be spending more it just Physics & basic maths . You want the world to save energy & be efficient .so you can do more things with your resources . hydrogen is resources hungry 😋 nearly 4 x hungry needing more energy more money more land more resources more time & less freedom & doesn’t give Independence to people only gives a select people Financial benefit
Cameron Scott As we move towards more renewables we will increasingly experience surpluses. Storing surplus energy is a major challenge. If surplus can be used to produce hydrogen then it starts to make a little more sense as a source of energy.
@@robsengahay5614 Could be useful for seasonal storage in the future, not for driving.
Simon Hydrogen looks a better option for cargo ships and large trucks than batteries. If you make the hydrogen how would you propose to utilise the energy? Transportation of goods seems worthy of consideration.
Excellent well thought-out presentation. You clearly did your homework. Not JUST opinion. Well balanced consideration of the pros and cons.
Needing electricity to make the hydrogen is the deal killer. Then you have to transport it like gasoline to the refuelling stations everywhere.
Electricity is already everywhere and relatively cheap.
Costa Rica has 1 hydrogen bus ,a least its something
El danielectric lol
do a bit of googling you will see plenty of countries and business are adopting Hydrongen Fuel cells for Busses, Heavy Goods, Trains, shipping.
Hi Matt, for now, DOA for cars.
Nice analysis!
👍 Thanks so much!
1:23 Anybody noticed Gunther standing... right there!!!!
Hydrogen fuel cell car becomes inefficient in these environment : on high mountain - less air / in the water or river - blocked ventilation
Petrol was inefficient at high altitudes at first. Hence early Spitfires in 1939-40.
"Hydrogen fuel cell car becomes inefficient in these environments:" Everywhere. lol
The biggest problem with fcev "cars" is that it takes much more electricity to produce the hydrogen, and yet only provides a faster refueling experience for long trips. In every other way, BEVs are better. There is really no good reason to replace passenger vehicles with fcevs. However, like he said in the video, large vehicles may have a better use as fcev then bevs. They need quick charging/fueling and long ranges. Quick charging causes issues with battery life. Not good anytime, but especially on huge batteries that may costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to replace.
@@anthonypelchat If we end up in a world with excess production of solar and wind power - producing 500,000 kg of Hydrogen per day makes perfect sense. 🛢️
Imagine if every European & American home had a dozen solar panels and we built 3,000% more wind turbines. We'd have the spare power to use for hydrogen production and thus it wouldn't really be a waste if electricity was sold for $0.02 per Kwh !
@@BoringRevolution It would still be a waste for passenger cars. No matter how cheap electricity is, you still need about twice as much to run a fcev as a a bev. Why would anyone spend twice as much to fuel an fcev when you can pay less for a bev and you can recharge at home.
The only way your scenario makes sense is if electricity costs drop in price drastically, fuel cell vehicles drop drastically, and bevs stay the same price. Otherwise, fcevs do not make any sense for passenger vehicles. except for very long road trips.
@@anthonypelchat we've got our wires crossed because I'm only talking about using Hydrogen for Semi-Trucks, Bulldozers, Big Vans, Buses, Trains, Excavators & Ships ! Its about finding that niche area and focusing on it.
Using Hydrogen for medium sized jets also makes sense i.e. a Lilium 24 seater VTOL Jet! Also here in the UK we have big plans for adding "some" H2 to our gas grid and using companies like Ceres UK to produce heating & power in homes via Fuel cells.
H fuel cells are dead, the cost to produce pure H are very high. We need new tech on battery.
I am delighted and enlightened by this presentation.
I would request to kindly tel about Grapheme batteries, it's development stage at present and economics, future etc.
Thanks.
Could fuel cells make sense for long-term grid level storage? Say generating the power in the summer to be stored and used in the winter. A storage tank being cheaper than a storage battery and with no self discharge problem?
Hydrogen 95% + made from methane in highly inefficient process , even with perfect renewable hydrogen production hydrogen is difficult to store without heavy tanks and keeping it safe . Large vehicles only or large ships
Pretty much 70% of all electricity produced on earth is of fossil fuel origin, not really better if you ask me...
Lithium is not renewable
In the winter hydrogen cars beat the crap out of evs.
they do? why? genuinely interested
@@figyplays6710 You lose a lot of range.
Not really... hydrogen is shit year-round.
Batteries are clearly going to dominate but I do see a small market for hydrogen for larger sizes vehicles where batteries just simply will not be feasible
Your vids are so damn good!
Thanks, Sean! That really means a lot.
When he proved the hypothesis not the theory FFS....
Time to buy some fuel cell stocks
Don't do it. I was in the fuel cell "business" around 2002. I was 100% sold then I started to run into the laws of physics. The problem is not the fuel cell; the problem is distribution of hydrogen. It has to be produced at each fueling station. You can't pipe it through the existing steel pipes due to hydrogen embridlement. There are about a dozen problems such as the water the things produce. It freezes in the wintertime in very cold climates. I could go on and on. This was a very good video and was honest about it.
I have them. The gave me a return of 30% last year and are somewhat stable since then. They haven't moved due to corona either. But maybe I was just lucky.
Average of $13.99 per kg?? Not even close! I've been driving my Clarity for about 15 months around CA, and the cheapest **by far** I've ever seen is $14.99/kg. $16 or $17/kg is much more common.
A fuel cell is the same thing as a battery. Instead of using lithium to carry the electrons from anode to cathode it uses hydrogen instead.
The situation of hydrogen cars is FAR worse than shown in this video. Toyota is basically giving away the Mirai and still very few get on the road.
The lease for the Mirai is $2499 down and $389 per month for 36 months and 12k mi/year. That adds up to $16005 in total. Toyota gives you $15k in hydrogen which leaves you with $1k cost to drive the car for 3 years.
Toyota is offering used Mirai's for sale. Prices range from high ~$17k to ~$25k, but also with $15k of hydrogen. Buy one for $17k and who cares about the horrible residual value?
$15k worth of hydrogen is ~1070 kg. Let's assume 50 mi per kg to come to 53.6k mi worth of hydrogen. That's even 17k mi more than is allowed under the lease contract.
So, great, you got yourself a free Mirai. Now try and find a hydrogen station... that is operational and has hydrogen. More than few stations are inoperational because of repairs or lack of hydrogen because of shortages. Not just a few days, but some have been closed for more than 2 months.
cafcp.org/stationmap
That doesn't sound "worse" that's GREAT NEWS to you as a consumer. Cheap vehicle. Oh WAIT! Wasn't Nissan and VM doing the same for Leaf and Volt 7-8 years ago?? Does that mean that BEV was doom back then? Nope, it's has to do with consumer knowledge, economy of scale, etc when something is at its infancy. Computers, Flat Screen TV, Cell phone ring a bell??
Can you buy a Mirrai and only use the battery ?
@@yutuniopati The battery of the Mirai has a capacity of less than 2 kWh. So, if there was a way to charge that battery without using hydrogen, you could probably drive about 5-6 miles.
Hydrogen filling stations are beeing built in asia specially japan , korea..
@@carholic-sz3qv And especially Japan is buying hydrogen made with gasification of coal, so driving on hydrogen is really driving on coal.
If they can ever get those Traveling Wave Reactors proven and up and running, we would have all the energy we could ever need. I think you're right on the difference between personal and massive scale usage. But at some point, making more and more batteries has a limit, and isn't necessarily great for the environment either.
I think Bill Gates more or less gave up on that design and moved to a molten salt Fast reactor design. The premise of the Traveling Wave Reactor always seemed quite odd to me. First, getting highly enriched uranium for it (I think around 30% U235), and then expecting that it will reasonably burn up from end to end like a candle ...? It didn't seem too feasible to me, but I'm only an enthusiast, not a nuclear scientist.
I have a Toyota Mirai and I love the luxury and comfort about it. There's a station near my dad's workplace that has a supplier with liquid hydrogen-which is much more effective. We've had no issues whatsoever and it's just an amazing car to have. Upgrading from a '96 corolla to a toyota mirai has been a milestone! Although electric is still more energy efficient, I'm just loving the moment! Of course, once the lease ends, we'll go all electric.
Good to hear a positive/first hand note on a FCV. Appreciate you sharing. Another viewer who owns a Mirai commented that he regretted it because of fueling issues (sounded like the car itself has been good though). He also said he’s going BEV when his lease is up.
One overlooked problem with hydrogen (other than abysmal effiiciency, high cost, and high maintenance) is: if your country goes for building the infrastructure but the neighboring country doesn't you can basically park your car at the border. This is very relevant in Europe. That's why hydrogen cars were first started in Japan. No borders you *can* drive over.
Hydrogen is good for places where you have to store power for long times (and possibly refueling is few and far between): Intercontinental flight, shipping, and seasonal energy storage.
pickle rick in the background! He's a man of culture.
Hydrogen generated from alternative energy and stored as amonia is the way. The technology is here now. The methods of transport and distribution are similar to compressed natural gas. Filtering the hydrogen from the amonia is being done now using the CSIRO hydrogen filter at the refueling site. Hyundai and Toyota are not silly, they are investors in this idea. Research hydrogen technology on the CSIRO website. They are the Australian science research people, the ones who gave you useable WiFi.
I think that hydrogen will really only take off for semi trucks, trains and ships, but ESPECIALLY for ships because they could generate their own fuel from the water they sit in.
@@theproffessional9 It is the ability to distribute hydrogen in the form of hydrogen rich amonia. This means it can be easily stored until it's needed then the hydrogen filtered out compressed and delivered to the vehicle of choice on site. Like I said , check out the CSIRO website.
You still have to produce the hydrogen, compress it and move it. Totally loss of money for all those operations. It will never reach cost parity with batteries. Get real.
@@patmcdaniel2016 Hydrogen from electrolysis of sea water. Electricity from solar, wind, tidal etc. Coversion to amonia for storage and shipping. All this tech is here now and being upscaled right now. Do some research.
@@rongibbins8155 Does not change one single fact that it cost money and energy to: compress, store and transport. wake up.
I'm waiting the fuel cell.
By the time I use up my current petro-powered car, I hope fuel-cell technology will have advanced enough to make it a viable option.
I hate the idea of waiting and hour to recharge an electric car.
So don't wait. Charge it up while you sleep.
@@Brian-om2hh
No. Thanks.
I'll wait.
How would fuel cells work for household heating or to provide electricity when solar systems need backup?
Excess energy generated by the solar system can be used to create hydrogen via electrolysis. The hydrogen is then stored for later purposes, for example at night when the solar system can't be used. The hydrogen can be fed into a fuel cell, which can combine it with pure oxygen (also generated from electrolysis) or ambient air depending on the fuel cell type (catalyst and membrane material)
Hope this helps
When oil is finally abandoned, fuel companies will start to sell it.
@Dark of the knight when mass battery recycling is needed it will become lucrative and be significantly easier to recycle in the future. right now we have limited recycling capacity because we haven't invested in that infrastructure. china was taking our recycling because of such extremely cheap labor.
Elon Musk came out and publicly ridiculed BMW about their commitment to hydrogen fuel cells. He simply said “it’s a stupid idea“😂 In Musk I Trust✊
Believe me when i tell you that eveey reasonable engineer that i know said that this comment of Musk was pretty much the most idiotic comment he ever made, directly surpassing his idiotic electric supersonic planes, it seems like Musk sometimes forgets his knowledge ...
@@mandernachluca3774 So how are they going to solve 20% efficiency of producing, compressing, cooling, liquefying, transporting and converting the hydrogen back to electricity?
@@kedaruss
Well, production first.
You can easily increase efficiency by increasing the number of electrolysers and therefor decreasing the needed voltage for a certain production of hydrogen to the optimal voltage wich is about 1,3 Volts.
Than there are some lesser known concepts like high temperature electrolysis wich pushes the efficiency up to 90 or even 100%.
These concepts are proven but relatively expensive.
Next up the storage of hydrogen, now i am asking you, have you ever heared about LOHC or metal hydrid? Both of these technologies don't require any compression and one of them is even a proven technology in the most modern milittary submarines.
Metalhydrid for example requires heat to release hydrogen, this heat can be taken from the fuel cells to further increase the efficiency of the whole system.
LOHC on the other hands does not need much heat, it requires a catalytic reaction to both store and release hydrogen and the catalyste os pretty cheap, as well as the storage fluid. LOHC is so safe, it would not light up when exposed to open flames.
To the efficiency of fuel cells, there are a lot of things, from moisting the incoming hydrogen to prevent the PEM membran from drying out to as little things as recirculating hydrogen that has not reacted with the air. Current real world efficiencies can be between 50-70% depending on the type of fuel cell and the power output.
@@mandernachluca3774 yes - I Heard about LOHC, DMFC and other methods of storing hydrogen but cannot find any information about it being more efficient than H2. I also heard about super silent Swedish submarine with fuel cells as the source of power - brilliant idea.
I have to admit that the idea of electrolysis being 100% efficient is interesting and I have to take a google for a ride with that. Especially if it involves high temperature. Maybe you could just help me with some source?
How far are we in general to getting close to BEV efficiency?
And thank you for your response - we are in YT comment section, good discussions do not happen very often here.
@Mandernach Luca. Ummm why would I believe in the comments of all your unnamed unsourced engineer buddies against the word of the man who has been judged as the greatest engineer who ever lived.
The simple base line physics of using energy to extract energy from water with no chance of the technology leaping to viable improvement AND the simple fact that Hydrogen fuel cell cars are dead in the water after so many attempts should change your perspective.
Do facts matter to you?
The last thing I heard was that the cost of making hydrogen fuel. Once we find a better solution for making liquid hydrogen then the cost will come down.
I'm under the impression that a lot of the hydrogen fuel is produced as a byproduct of oil mining. Basically meaning it's only cost effective as long as the oil companies want it to. Most of the solutions seem to involve putting a lot of energy into producing hydrogen which makes me wonder if it makes more sense to just put that energy into an EV.
You also need to find a way to compress air without using energy, make a more efficient fuel cell, as well as compressing and cooling the Hydrogen, and producing it via electrolysis all without creating heat. Oh and find a material that can hold Hydrogen without it leaking out.
My place of work is the leading diaphragm compressor company in the world. I assemble hydrogen compressors and pump stations for a living. Countries like Taiwan,China and Japan have been using fuel cells for years. Mostly busses and forklifts,but hydrogen is HUGE right now.
I'd like to see a hydrogen fuel cell jumbo jet
Why? Because that would be an ultra inefficient thing to do.
Hydrogen will never win over battery electric. If you have solar on your home with battery storage there is no cleaner way to charge (fuel) your car. Hydrogen is just trading one gas pump for another!
Agreed.
If you are a renter or don't have space in your garage you won't want battery but hydrogen will work great.
Renters normally don't have solar. Not everyone lives the same life as you.
Hydrogen doesn't have to win over electric. They can co-exist to serve different purposes. Also, trading one gas pump for another is great if it can get rid of gas.
@@UndecidedMF If you have solar on your home you could create your own hydrogen and store it -- just like people in America that have large propane tanks on their property today. Why not use hydrogen to store energy for when solar isn't available? Plus you can refill your vehicle in minutes versus hours.
@@IrelandVonVicious But charging BEV is still cheaper than refueling H2 even if you don't have solar (or live in Australia).
The lack of fuel cell stations is ironic if we all remember that only a few years ago this was the exact same argument against EVs: "lack of charging stations." Now they are plentiful enough everywhere, and keep growing in numbers each day. The free market and economy of scale create nice things and very affordable.
Indeed, there's a market for multiple clean fuel options.
While I was filling up my CNG Honda at the air resources board in diamond bar California. There were about 4 Muri and a Clarity over on the H2 side. Filling the Clarity came out to about $89. My CNG was $2.39 per gallon gasoline equivalent. Also, no line. I smiled as I drove away in my quarter million-mile Honda.
$89 .. ugh.
It works by keeping fossils in the loop...
Fuelcells are the future for ships... And you need too much energy to produce hydrogen. The transportation and the storage is to difficult, but our goverments love it, because the consumer can easily pay taxes on it.
Markus Nusser Its also another reason for fossil fuels to stay relevant with all their big political donations.
Governments can tax anything. They have taxed rainfall, scenic views, electricity, TVs, air, water, your labor, your land, .... Worry not, they can tax anything.
A US aircraft carrier was in my hometown recently. It was powered by 2 nuclear reactors.
Markus - you can make FCV more efficient by producing Hydrogen with Renewable Energy.
America in WWII had Secret Hydrogen plants at DAMS for the Manhattan Project.
No it doesnt cost too much energy to produce the most abundant element in the universe LOL
Hyundai is selling 700 a month in South Korea. It is the 3rd highest selling EV there. They are selling in very low numbers in CA, but there about 9,000 of them on the roads there.
One thing they don’t tell you is besides limited fueling stations there are usually long lines and the station never ever reaches full compression capability to fully replenish your tank to 100%. In my 4 months of leasing a Clarity, I have been able to get a full refueling to 360 miles range once! Most of the time it gets to 260 miles and then station loses compression power to push anymore gas into your tank, especially after a series of fueling other cars ahead of you. Too many times I leave a station and getting only 2 kg in. And it can take up to 20-30 minutes of waiting to get to your turn. A fast charging EV can reach 60-80% charge by then. Free fuel is great but the cost of time and mental anguish is too much.
When the price goes down The hydrogen fuel cell car is it. Till then i drive diesel.
Hydrogen cars can't be cheaper than Diesel. You'll get an electric car that can drive 1000 miles on a single charge before you get affordable hydrogen cars.
That last part is the actual end goal: keep driving diesel. That is the entire reason many people are propping up hydrogen; it gives them an excuse not to invest the time, effort and money to switch to battery electric car.
Hydrogen fuel is the future.....
Of dumb ideas
Spock, are you out of your Vulcan mind??? 😁
I tip my hat to you.
In some alternate reality maybe. It will never be in this reality.
Hydrogen does quite well at larger scale vehicles. So I really don't know why ya'll are giving it so much hate.
Like EV's are better for personal vehicles. Hydrogen is better for larger scale vehicles.
The future ... since 1998 (the very first Mercedes A class was supposed to run on methanol reforming fuel cells in 1998).
Thank you for your good article. You are the first commentator I see who doesn't get stuck on the efficiency issue: "hydrogen is inefficient, therefore it will never make sense." The truth is: efficiency does not matter, only cost of ownership, value to the consumer, and environmental performance. Infrastructure and delivery cost are important issues that limit near-term H2 automobiles, but they are not fundamental physical issues and can therefore be addressed in the future.
Nice video, Matt. Thanks.
Thanks, Nickie!
I'm pro fuel cell !
@GaunletofDestruction All these car companies are sleepwalking their way into electric cars,they maybe ideal if you have unlimited access to charging points but in cities this is
virtually unobtainable your whole existance would be involved in continually trying to find a charging point,even if every lampost had two charging points it still wouldn't be even near enough,this is without touching on the added electrical generation that would be required
Good for you. Now get a fuel cell car and be miserable. Maybe you will learn that way.
I am pro Fuel cell. I cannot see any indication th Lithium Ion
batters will ever reach the energy to all the Tesla Semi to replace the 1000hp
120ton roadtrans that populate the roads of Australia (and as the bumper sticker
says "without trucks Australia stops" IN comparison to these large road trains,
the Tesla "Semi" is a Tonker Toy
Anf as the USA already cannot tolerate thatChina may Control a technology such
as 5G - how will it tolerate being beholden to China for its Lithium supplies
This overlooks the fact that the lawless ,slave driven business of mining
Cobalt in he DEmocratic Republic of the Congo. In view of the current attitude
about slavery its hard to see how the public would jump on the bandwagon of
relying on slave labour to provide their transport. But Germany has made use
of Fuel CEll Technology to power their Coradia iLint Passanger Train. A
Technology that can power a TRain must surely be sufficiently proven to power
Large TRucks and Road Trains. If we are relying on low power density batteries
to power vehicles which are small Aluminium devices; mankind has not found the
answer.
there isn't time to wait for the manufacture of millions of hydrogen cars, we just need millions of engine replacement kits,
limiting factors:
• Platinum availability and cost for PEM (Electrolytic and Fuel Cells)
• H2 storage density, energy required to release it, danger of explosion/fire
All are being addressed and we have intermediate, if not ideal solutions and many promising nanmaterials are being devellpp that may address these, but Hydrogen as an energy storage is safe and useable NOW!
THIS COULD QUICKLY BEGIN TO REPLACE THE FOSSIL FUEL ECONOMY WITH A HYDRIGEN ECONOMY, THAT W I L L REMOVE CARBON FROM EMISSIONS, AS H2 EMITS ONLY WATER AND HEAT
A) LICENSE DESIGNS FOR VEHICLE ENGINE REPLACEMENT K I T S COMPRISING OF:
• a suitably rated electric motor
• a Proton Exchange Membrane FUEL CELL STACK
• A COMPRESSED HYDROGEN fuel tank (carbon fibre)
• piping, control, monitoring electronics and safety systems
OR a atck of Alminium-Air batteries (in reality, really, aluminium Fuel cells) www.metalectrique.com/
Recycle the metal from the discarded engine to manufacture more electric motors
B) AWARD LICENSES FOR HYDROGEN MANUFACTURE AND DISTRIBUTION
1) BUILDINGS/PUBLIC SREEET AND POTHER LIGHTING:
Renewable Electricity + distilled water ---> PEM Electrolytic Cells = HYDROGEN (H2) + OXYGEN (O2) ---> STORAGE
2) AUTOMOTIVE/RAIL/ SHIPPOING/HAULAGE/PUBLIC TRANSPORT FLEETS
H2 PRODUCTIPON BY RENEWABLE ----> STORAGE
PIPED OR TRUCKED TO H2 ---> Fuel pumps ---> PEM FUEL CELL VEHICLES: ---> Transportation
Emissions: Ultrapure H2O at tail pipe, and heat at the fue cell
P.S. ULTRAPURE WATER CAN BE COLLECTED AND DELIVERED BACK INTO THE ELECTROLYSIS CYCLE.
Good as far as it goes but here what the hydrogen industry does not talk about:
- A hydrogen dispenser (as shown at a gas station) can only refuel 26 vehicles per day with a daily delivery of 130 kg of hydrogen
- put another way a typical gas station can refuel 600 vehicles per day but to fuel the same number of hydrogen vehicles would require 26 hydrogen truck deliveries per day to the station. There would not be enough room for the above ground tanks anyway
- Only 2 or 3 hydrogen cars can be fueled in succession without a 10-15 minute pause while the tanks restore tank pressure and rechill the hydrogen (hydrogen heats when it expands into a car tank- one of three gases that heats when expanded)
- Hydrogen buses have been tried before and failed due to high operating and maintenance costs. (Canada $90 million write off in 2014 of 20 buses and more recently hydrogen buses returned in Germany)
- The only current clean form of hydrogen (from electrolysis) costs $23/kg or twice the going price of gray hydrogen (67% from methane) in California
- Hydrogen for short and medium trucks is out as it cannot compete with batteries.
- Hydrogen for long distance trucking is also out as any power-train breakdown requires towing to a highly specialized maintenance facility. This is the same reason CNG trucks are not in widespread use - only with hydrogen the costs are much higher. Long distance trucking is all about cost per ton and on-time deliveries.
- Another reason long distance trucking is out is that it cannot support the infrastructure cost nor the doubling of fuel costs.
Bottom line: Hydrogen is DOA for roadway transportation and it is just a matter of how much taxpayer money will be wasted on infrastructure and fuel subsidies before it is abandoned.
Great vid👍
Hydrogen for buses. EV for cars. There you go, I have just solved all future concerns over fossil fuels and climate change. Thank you and goodnight.
Making hydrogen buses is stupid because hydrogen needs a lot of energy to be produced and the vehicles lose more energy than EV, making these type of vehicles extremely inefficient compared to EV counterparts. The future is EV and even if it needs more time to charge and batteries aren't dense enough with current technology, you can simply have extra batteries or extra buses, just like we do with drones today
@@FAQUERETERMAX Did you even watch the video? He puts the case forward for hydrogen on larger vehicles such as buses. Watch it from 5:05 onwards.
@@DeltaV3 yep
@@DeltaV3 The fact that some countries are starting to use hydrogen buses in a small scale doesn't mean it's always a good idea. The main reason for them is getting goverment incentives for going green or developing their own sustainable systems, even if it's actually not as good as full electric.
Factually incorrect. Powerhouse Energy Group. Hydrogen from waste.
well this thing make me realize two things, one gasoline is dirt cheap in the US, my country main export is petroleum and the gas is almost double, but the average wage is like $500 us.
two, just california has regulated the hydrogen stations, in some states were banned or heavily taxed/unfunded so it will be more expensive.
the thing is that all the people sees tesla and muxk and thinks he is a genius and a prophet or something, the man is a smart bussinesman, like steve jobs, he invented/ produced few things but invest in marketing and people bought it, EVs are cool but the production of lithium produces dangerous waste, but hey as long as is in China/asia/south america, my tesla will help the enviromet, right?, also the lithum is scarse and very heavily concentrated in some zines and the suply will not be enought for the demand (I mean, if all cars become EV), that if only cars used this type of batteries.
goverments in Europe, australia and japan are investing heavily in hydrogen because if the economies of scale reach a point were it becomes rentable, they will control suply of cars and the fuel without depend on foreing countries for gas.
Also it well be more convenient spending 2 minutes refuil the hydrogen tank that spend hours charging a battery. If the demand of electricity would increase the only solution besides burning carbon/gas/petroleum for energ will be nuclear, and a lot of countries are getting away from this tech, so if a country invest heavily in nuclear/ other clean and cheap sources of power(i mean like 3 times the need of the specific country) and produces cheap hydrogen it could rival petroleum in the long run
There are so many holes in what you're saying I don't even know where to start. I suggest doing a little research before claiming so much.
I got my Taycan BEV because I hate having to fill up at the pump. I live in an upscale neighborhood where gas stations are far and few in between, so making a trip just to fill up the tank is a huge inconvenience. I get range anxiety often with gas cars because I'm a procrastinator. I drive about 35 miles per day so I only need to charge my EV car weekly with plenty of range to spare. Sure it takes a lot of time to charge up compared to fill up, but I do it at night when I'm sleeping. As for longer road trips, I live in Dallas and visit my parents in Houston about 3 times a year. I just rent a gas SUV whenever I need to and not put the miles on my car. It's a little less convenient but neither is it convenient having to do an oil change after a long road trip in a gas car. The fact is that most EV owners with a Single Family House don't need to go to public charge stations for daily usage. Fuel cells offers none of the conveniences that I'm looking for and makes it worse for me because there are even less fill up stations.
Surprised I missed this one--a crucial topic for me.
Hydrogen is a dead end. The internal combustion engine is on the way out.
Correct
Um. Were you paying attention?
Most anti-EVs in Italy say that hydrogen is the future and that it's safer, cheaper and cleaner
Why just people talk bull****?
Because they are misinformed. Don't stop informing others in a non-confrontational way.
Mick B Bugatti is frence 🇫🇷
Fuel cells are DOA, the inefficiency is the killer
Interesting facts:
-you need a 20kW air pump for a 150kW fuel cell (its basically an electric turbo, would go nicely in a combustion car if you had a 400V supply)
-Fuel cell only works between 50-100C
-Battery is needed to start it and drive for a few minutes while it heats up
-You can't do regen without a battery
-A Toyota Mirai has space for the equvalient of 5 gallons of diesel (366 miles)
My best estimate atm for electricity-electricity efficiency for hyrodgen production and fuel cell generation (basically a hydrogen battery) is about 38%
This compares to a Tesla powerwall, which is quoted at 92.5% round trip
Given electricity with some CO2 content, its probably more CO2 efficient currently to use LPG ICE/Hybrid.
Because of the efficiency you need 2.5x more electricity for a FCEV than a BEV per mile
Because of the investment needed for hydrogen fuel stations you need everyone to convert to Hydrogen
For large long range road vehicles the best system is a BEV FC hybrid with a large battery and small fuel cell and tank to extend the range (maximise cheap grid electricity use with top range from refillable hydrogen), but because of the investment needed to get Hydrogen fuel stations not enough Hydorgen would be used and it wouldn't pay off. Hydrogen vehicle suppliers are commited to saying that cheap Hydrogen 'can' be produced, but as yet it has not. Hydrogen has become a Ponzi Scheme.
For planes the inefficiency and cost might be justifyable, but the hydrogen just takes up too much space, again LPG hybrid could be more friendly.
For boats wind and solar + batteries are a possibility, efficiency and running cost are important.
I lease a Honda Clarity in northern California. About two months ago there was a major explosion at a hydrogen producing facility. Now, four of the closest H2 filling stations are closed and I have to drive 30 miles out of my way just to refill. Maintenance costs are also very expensive. My yearly normal maintenance costs over $600. Previously, with my prior BEV, the maintenance was $0 over two years. The Clarity was also recalled three times. One of those recalls was to replace the fuel stack. Although it was covered under warranty, the service rep told me that the replacement normally costs $30,000! Of the 37 hydrogen stations located in California, only 23 are currently operating.
So I fully agree with your analysis. Fuel cells do not make sense for automobiles. My beta-tester experiment with fuel cells has convinced me that when my lease expires in seven months, I will buy a Tesla.
Good thing you leased. Or it would be like buying an HD DVD player when it was obvious bluray was going to win that race.
Wow. Thanks for sharing your experience. Kind of sounds like a nightmare right now with having to drive 30 miles just to get fuel. At least you’re only 7 months away from moving on to something better.