Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

IGetNakedAtParties t1_j63dm81 wrote

Reply to comment by Hypx in Cryo-compressed hydrogen, the best solution for storage and refueling stations? by Hypx

For sure costs will decline for both, but the physics of the supply chain will always give a cost benefit to batteries where they are practical. And we should not be waiting for anything as TCO of BEVs is already on par to ICE.

It's that which makes me critical of all "hydrogen cars" articles, I've yet to read one without a connection to the oil or ICE industry.

3

Hypx OP t1_j63f2ho wrote

Even after just now, after a 80% increase in energy density? You do realize that at this density, a few tanks the size of scuba tanks will easily get you 300 miles of range in a hydrogen car? Volume wise, it's basically the same as a gasoline tank in a conventional car. So pretty vast amounts of cost is coming out of that hydrogen car.

And yet you're so certain that this can't be cheaper...

0

IGetNakedAtParties t1_j63fcu1 wrote

Unless cryogenically liquifying hydrogen has a negative energy cost, yes. The physics doesn't make sense.

3

Hypx OP t1_j63fugu wrote

Are the batteries in your EV free in this example? We're talking about a hypothetical hydrogen car that is effectively identical to a conventional car in basic material needs.

Also, this is not liquid hydrogen. You should read the article.

0

IGetNakedAtParties t1_j63plkb wrote

OK, I'm interested in making this calculation, I'm happy to have my assumptions challenged.

As per my link, the efficiency of BEVs from source to wheel is 76%, the current same for hydrogen is 30%. This technology will likely make this worse for H2 in exchange for better practical applications, range, weight, etc.

If you want to compare a hypothetical H2 car against a real world BEV lets compare a Tesla Model Y against the best case H2.

Assumptions:

12 year vehicle lifetime

14 000 miles per year

0.0456 $ per mile (typical home charging)

0.1155 $ per mile (assuming the above relationship, this accounts for inflation in the comparison)

These numbers give us the cost of energy difference at $11 743 in favour of the BEV. Given that a replacement MY batters is $15 000 you are correct that the H2 is better economy than the BEV, however the BEV exists now, with a charging infrastructure, but the H2 vehicle does not. Also whilst H2 costs aren't likely to change much with economy of scale, this definitely isn't true of battery technology.

Basically my previous points stand, H2 is going to be important for some uses, but there is a danger that stories about it give the illusion that we don't need to stop using ICE now and switch to BEVs for personal vehicles for both environmental and economic reasons.

One can be pro BEV and pro H2 at the same time.

3

Hypx OP t1_j65d048 wrote

But no talked about what is better right now.

You're just making a big fuss while basically accepting my point.

0

IGetNakedAtParties t1_j65e6c0 wrote

Please don't manipulate what I say for your gain.

1

Hypx OP t1_j65efnj wrote

This is futurology. You're just being a jerk while missing the point.

0