5 ms·

Let's consider hydrogen cars are the next big thing. Is it a good move to go massively towards electric cars? Especially regarding batteries that will have to b

by lolive 8y ago

Let's consider hydrogen cars are the next big thing. Is it a good move to go massively towards electric cars? Especially regarding batteries that will have to be massively replaced in 2 years?

lustysocietyorg 8y ago
AFAIK use of hydrogen is inefficient in several ways (creation, storage) and thus there is no reason to expect that hydrogen fuel is the next big thing for cars. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNV8qi_rJBg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNV8qi_rJBg IMO the next big things are: - Fuel like ethanol. https://newscenter.lbl.gov/2017/09/18/solar-fuel-system-recycles-co2-for-ethanol-ethylene/ https://newscenter.lbl.gov/2017/09/18/solar-fuel-system-recy... - Quickly charging batteries that are not affected by dendrites.
- lolive 8y ago
  From that perspective, there will be a strong need for various rare earth elements. Leading to an insane amount of pollution. Are there any breakthroughs in rare earth extraction & treatment process?
  - pjc50 8y ago
    Yes, extraction from "red mud" (a widely available waste product of aluminium extraction): https://kuleuven.sim2.be/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Rodolfo_BR_2018.pdf https://kuleuven.sim2.be/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Rodolfo_... The resulting pollution level is effectively a cost choice. You've not explained where all this hydrogen is supposed to come from and get transported.
  - rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
    > From that perspective, there will be a strong need for various rare earth elements. Leading to an insane amount of pollution. Are there any breakthroughs in rare earth extraction & treatment process? What rare earth elements are you talking about, exactly? I keep hearing about the scarcity of such "rare" elements, but except lithium (which isn't that rare, it's just we haven't invested in the infrastructure), I'm not aware of the lack of any other materials needed for EV cells.
    - pjc50 8y ago
      Yeah, there's a lot of nonspecific scaremongering; I think the bottleneck metal at the moment is cobalt, but Tesla and others are working on that. http://www.mining.com/tesla-delivers-bad-news-cobalt-price/ http://www.mining.com/tesla-delivers-bad-news-cobalt-price/
  - lustysocietyorg 8y ago
    Rare earth is not "that" rare. Not every rare earth element is equally rare. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare-earth_element https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare-earth_element Quote: Despite their name, rare-earth elements are – with the exception of the radioactive promethium – relatively plentiful in Earth's crust From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neodymium https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neodymium: Although neodymium is classed as a rare earth, it is a fairly common element, no rarer than cobalt, nickel, or copper, and is widely distributed in the Earth's crust. Good practices and recycling could be very important with regard to costs and environment protection. There is always progress if progress is financed. Example: https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2018/11/european-ecoswing-builds-first-full-scale-superconductor-wind-turbine.html https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2018/11/european-ecoswing-buil... Quote: A conventional wind generator making 1MW of power will have about one tonne of neodymium in its magnets. The superconductor uses about 1 kilogram of the rare earth gadolinium. It costs just $18.70/kg (£14.50/kg) of gadolinium oxide versus $45.50/kg of neodymium oxide. I doubt that the rare earth is an important cost factor for such a turbine. http://www.windustry.org/how_much_do_wind_turbines_cost http://www.windustry.org/how_much_do_wind_turbines_cost Quote: The costs for a utility scale wind turbine range from about $1.3 million to $2.2 million per MW of nameplate capacity installed. Most of the commercial-scale turbines installed today are 2 MW in size and cost roughly $3-$4 million installed.
pjc50 8y ago
> Let's consider hydrogen cars are the next big thing. .. let's not? Where are you getting the hydrogen, and how are you transporting it in the car?
- rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
  >Where are you getting the hydrogen Fossil fuels (nat gas, more specifically). Betting on electrolysis to produce hydrogen economically from renewable sources is as fanciful as betting on batteries to be made from renewable materials.
benj111 8y ago
Why 2 years? Batteries last longer than that. Hydrogen has problems, hydrogen embrittlement, its extremely hard to contain. Additionally hydrogen's major strength, that it continues the current fill up at a filling station dynamic* means that it needs to start making gains now, while there are still petrol stations left, to make the switch to hydrogen. Hydrogen may well 'win' but I don't think its an open and shut case. *yes you can generate hydrogen at home. In that situation you basically you have the same tradeoffs as a standard battery
- rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
  >Hydrogen may well 'win' but I don't think its an open and shut case. How? My understanding is that hydrogen is either produced from fossil fuels (aka non-renewable) or from electrolysis but the latter won't be economical for many decades AFAIK. Worst, all things considered, hydrogen cars are still far less efficient that battery EV: https://insideevs.com/efficiency-compared-battery-electric-73-hydrogen-22-ice-13/ https://insideevs.com/efficiency-compared-battery-electric-7...
  - NeedMoreTea 8y ago
    Orkney are in the early stages of moving to hydrogen from electrolysis for the ferries. To replace diesel and because they've already reached 100% of power from renewables so they're actively looking for other fossil uses they can move to renewable. Germany has some similar projects creating hydrogen as storage for renewables, and replacing some diesel trains with hydrogen. I'm less convinced it will replace petrol, but there is definitely a case for it replacing many uses of diesel.
  - benj111 8y ago
    Petrol is less efficient, but like hydrogen it is more energy dense. And you also have a tank like petrol cars so people don't have to worry about new fangled batteries and running out of electricity. You seem to be over estimating my support for hydrogen. My next car will more likely be battery powered, and I'd be buying battery, rather than hydrogen shares, but it isn't without merit.
hokkos 8y ago
Let's not, it cost 80k$ for a Mirai and it use 4 times more electricity than an EV. With a more complex infrastructure to build.

by lolive 8y ago

Let's consider hydrogen cars are the next big thing. Is it a good move to go massively towards electric cars? Especially regarding batteries that will have to be massively replaced in 2 years?

lustysocietyorg 8y ago

AFAIK use of hydrogen is inefficient in several ways (creation, storage) and thus there is no reason to expect that hydrogen fuel is the next big thing for cars. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNV8qi_rJBg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNV8qi_rJBg IMO the next big things are: - Fuel like ethanol. https://newscenter.lbl.gov/2017/09/18/solar-fuel-system-recycles-co2-for-ethanol-ethylene/ https://newscenter.lbl.gov/2017/09/18/solar-fuel-system-recy... - Quickly charging batteries that are not affected by dendrites.

lolive 8y ago
From that perspective, there will be a strong need for various rare earth elements. Leading to an insane amount of pollution. Are there any breakthroughs in rare earth extraction & treatment process?
- pjc50 8y ago
  Yes, extraction from "red mud" (a widely available waste product of aluminium extraction): https://kuleuven.sim2.be/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Rodolfo_BR_2018.pdf https://kuleuven.sim2.be/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Rodolfo_... The resulting pollution level is effectively a cost choice. You've not explained where all this hydrogen is supposed to come from and get transported.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
  > From that perspective, there will be a strong need for various rare earth elements. Leading to an insane amount of pollution. Are there any breakthroughs in rare earth extraction & treatment process? What rare earth elements are you talking about, exactly? I keep hearing about the scarcity of such "rare" elements, but except lithium (which isn't that rare, it's just we haven't invested in the infrastructure), I'm not aware of the lack of any other materials needed for EV cells.
  - pjc50 8y ago
    Yeah, there's a lot of nonspecific scaremongering; I think the bottleneck metal at the moment is cobalt, but Tesla and others are working on that. http://www.mining.com/tesla-delivers-bad-news-cobalt-price/ http://www.mining.com/tesla-delivers-bad-news-cobalt-price/
- lustysocietyorg 8y ago
  Rare earth is not "that" rare. Not every rare earth element is equally rare. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare-earth_element https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare-earth_element Quote: Despite their name, rare-earth elements are – with the exception of the radioactive promethium – relatively plentiful in Earth's crust From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neodymium https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neodymium: Although neodymium is classed as a rare earth, it is a fairly common element, no rarer than cobalt, nickel, or copper, and is widely distributed in the Earth's crust. Good practices and recycling could be very important with regard to costs and environment protection. There is always progress if progress is financed. Example: https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2018/11/european-ecoswing-builds-first-full-scale-superconductor-wind-turbine.html https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2018/11/european-ecoswing-buil... Quote: A conventional wind generator making 1MW of power will have about one tonne of neodymium in its magnets. The superconductor uses about 1 kilogram of the rare earth gadolinium. It costs just $18.70/kg (£14.50/kg) of gadolinium oxide versus $45.50/kg of neodymium oxide. I doubt that the rare earth is an important cost factor for such a turbine. http://www.windustry.org/how_much_do_wind_turbines_cost http://www.windustry.org/how_much_do_wind_turbines_cost Quote: The costs for a utility scale wind turbine range from about $1.3 million to $2.2 million per MW of nameplate capacity installed. Most of the commercial-scale turbines installed today are 2 MW in size and cost roughly $3-$4 million installed.

pjc50 8y ago

> Let's consider hydrogen cars are the next big thing. .. let's not? Where are you getting the hydrogen, and how are you transporting it in the car?

rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
>Where are you getting the hydrogen Fossil fuels (nat gas, more specifically). Betting on electrolysis to produce hydrogen economically from renewable sources is as fanciful as betting on batteries to be made from renewable materials.

benj111 8y ago

Why 2 years? Batteries last longer than that. Hydrogen has problems, hydrogen embrittlement, its extremely hard to contain. Additionally hydrogen's major strength, that it continues the current fill up at a filling station dynamic* means that it needs to start making gains now, while there are still petrol stations left, to make the switch to hydrogen. Hydrogen may well 'win' but I don't think its an open and shut case. *yes you can generate hydrogen at home. In that situation you basically you have the same tradeoffs as a standard battery

rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
>Hydrogen may well 'win' but I don't think its an open and shut case. How? My understanding is that hydrogen is either produced from fossil fuels (aka non-renewable) or from electrolysis but the latter won't be economical for many decades AFAIK. Worst, all things considered, hydrogen cars are still far less efficient that battery EV: https://insideevs.com/efficiency-compared-battery-electric-73-hydrogen-22-ice-13/ https://insideevs.com/efficiency-compared-battery-electric-7...
- NeedMoreTea 8y ago
  Orkney are in the early stages of moving to hydrogen from electrolysis for the ferries. To replace diesel and because they've already reached 100% of power from renewables so they're actively looking for other fossil uses they can move to renewable. Germany has some similar projects creating hydrogen as storage for renewables, and replacing some diesel trains with hydrogen. I'm less convinced it will replace petrol, but there is definitely a case for it replacing many uses of diesel.
- benj111 8y ago
  Petrol is less efficient, but like hydrogen it is more energy dense. And you also have a tank like petrol cars so people don't have to worry about new fangled batteries and running out of electricity. You seem to be over estimating my support for hydrogen. My next car will more likely be battery powered, and I'd be buying battery, rather than hydrogen shares, but it isn't without merit.

hokkos 8y ago

Let's not, it cost 80k$ for a Mirai and it use 4 times more electricity than an EV. With a more complex infrastructure to build.