5 ms·

> natural gas -> hydrogen and CO2 -> separate out CO2 -> geological CO2 storage. Everything I've seen about H2 tells me that electric cars are just better. Luc

> natural gas -> hydrogen and CO2 -> separate out CO2 -> geological CO2 storage. Everything I've seen about H2 tells me that electric cars are just better. Luckily for your theory, it's still possible to do what you want with electric cars - just carbon capture at electric power plants.

bobthepanda 8y ago
Maybe cars, but the weight of batteries is a problem for larger vehicles that need long range, like a bus, truck, or plane. For those hydrogen might be better.
- tonyedgecombe 8y ago
  Trams, trains, high speed rail.
  - Cthulhu_ 8y ago
    There's some bus lines with overhead lines as well. The problem is of course infrastructural, and you still need truck for the last X miles. Which is where Tesla and that other electric truck company come in, of course.
  - bobthepanda 8y ago
    Call me when we have transpacific or transatlantic high speed rail, or when we have a route linking Europe to Asia or Africa that doesn't take the better part of two days.
    - tonyedgecombe 8y ago
      Call me when transpacific or transatlantic air travel is carbon neutral.
- nordsieck 8y ago
  > the weight of batteries is a problem for larger vehicles that need long range, like a bus, truck, or plane. For those hydrogen might be better. China is already leading the world in electric busses. They work great. Busses are such good vehicles for batteries, that for some routes it may even make sense to run them with super-capacitors, with chargers embedded in the road at stops. Trucks are always going to be a problem. This is probably the area where H2 might have the best shot. The big problem, however, is that they are a relatively small portion of vehicles. If they're the only ones running H2, it's probably not going to work. Airplanes, for the most part, aren't going to be electric (although I've heard rumblings of short-range commuter electric aircraft being planned). I doubt they'll be hydrogen powered either. While they aren't as encumbered by the rocket equation as... rockets, they do feel pressure from additional weight. Additionally, the added volume of H2 compared to something like avgas (on a MJ normalized basis) would negatively affect the aerodynamic efficiency of airplanes. Probably going to stay with petroleum for the foreseeable future.
  - Jedi72 8y ago
    A small percentage of vehicles by sheer number perhaps, but not by miles travelled. An average truck is working 50 hr weeks, plus commute time for the driver etc. As opposed to your average car which runs twice a day for 30 mins.
    - bluGill 8y ago
      Still a small percentage. While the average car is 30 minutes twice a day, the small percentage of cars that are not average are still more than the trucks. People on vacation can drive all day. The average car is used for a dentist appoint in the middle of the day once in a while - this all adds up to a lot of cars on the road.
  - dwighttk 8y ago
    >If they're the only ones running H2, it's probably not going to work. Aren't they practically the only ones running diesel currently? Maybe Trains + other diesel vehicles is a surprisingly large percentage, but... I'd be surprised.
- taneq 8y ago
  I think that's backwards. Size and weight of batteries is more of a problem at smaller scales - electric motorcycles get up to around 220 miles (Zero SR) compared with electric cars at 370 miles (Tesla Model S). The Tesla Semi has an advertised range of up to 500 miles.
  - dwighttk 8y ago
    >The Tesla Semi has an advertised range of up to 500 miles. I'll believe it when they ship it.
  - dredmorbius 8y ago
    What's the recharge time for that motorcycle?
    - taneq 8y ago
      They're a little cagey about that (https://www.zeromotorcycles.com/charging/ https://www.zeromotorcycles.com/charging/) but it looks like it can fast charge in ~1hr and charge off a standard wall outlet "overnight".
      - dredmorbius 8y ago
        Right. I'd think a bike would charge quickly. Tesla S require 4h45m at 240V/90a, and 52 hours on 110v (prusumably 20a). https://www.cars.com/articles/2013/11/how-quickly-does-the-tesla-model-s-battery-charge/ https://www.cars.com/articles/2013/11/how-quickly-does-the-t... Both range and recover matter.
- Arnt 8y ago
  Some buses need long range, such as that from Munich to Baku. That's not the common case: the common case is more like line 59 in Munich, whose route is about 14km long. A lot more people take the 59 to work than take the bus towards Baku. Trucks: There are different kinds, but you can separate them into "ones that could be replaced by trains" and "ones that don't really need long range" and not be very wrong. There are exceptions, such as sparsely populated areas, but they're tautologically minor. Planes: Need dense energy, sure.
  - bobthepanda 8y ago
    Presumably the bus running on line 59 doesn't run once a day; it makes lots of loops back and forth on line 59. Electric charging is not so fast that you can do it in the short amount of time that buses are required to turn around, which is usually measured in minutes. A rail network rarely has capacity for both decent freight (America) and decent passenger service (Europe). There are some exceptions to this rule, like China. But on their end that necessitated building an entirely new national rail network so that they could make room for freight trains on the old one.
    - Arnt 8y ago
      Are you saying that the 59 can't be electric because then it would have to wait empty at its two destinations for twenty minutes instead of ten before starting its next route, and that's impossible?
      - bobthepanda 8y ago
        Nothing is impossible, but it's certainly more difficult. If charging time is twenty minutes and the bus needs to be out in ten, you need two additional buses on standby to maintain the current schedule (one for each direction.) Except you need more than two, because transit agencies keep a "spare factor" of buses in case a bus breaks down or is otherwise unexpectedly available, and so you probably need ~2.2 buses for this single route. Scale this up across an entire bus network and that could easily be a hundred or two additional buses. And when you're talking about increasing the fleet by that much, you need to consider storage space for said buses. It's incredibly hard to site bus depots, because you want to minimize the distance from the depot to the start of the line, but you also have to consider the price of land and whether or not a land parcel's best use is a parking lot for buses. And this is before you consider that very few people want a parking lot they can't use as a neighbor. And so what seems to be a small problem can very quickly snowball into a large one. Public transit agencies aren't exactly flush with cash to buy a larger fleet than otherwise necessary, or land to store said larger fleet. And even if they had this money, is it best spent going electric? Money that is spent going electric is money not being used to keep the fare down or boost services.
- ivanhoe 8y ago
  There's a big difference between US, Canada or Australia, and say Europe regarding this. In Europe the majority of buses and trucks don't need to travel long distances. And as the population in Europe is generally much more dense soon there will be a local infrastructure of recharging stations available everywhere, so even those that need to cross long distances won't have a big problem recharging more often. The regulations in EU are really strict on bus and truck drivers, so they have to make a lot of stops and take regular breaks anyway (every 4.5 hours IIRC)
  - bobthepanda 8y ago
    Buses travel long distances because they run the same route throughout the day, and the turnaround time of a bus is expected to be minimal. Alberquerque, New Mexico had the not unreasonable requirement that a bus should have a range of 442 km, but the buses that were delivered could not reliably meet that goal on a route that has some elevation gain and in a hot climate. https://www.abqjournal.com/1246094/abq-rejecting-all-byd-art-buses-switching-to-non-electric.html https://www.abqjournal.com/1246094/abq-rejecting-all-byd-art...
scythe 8y ago
For cars, sure. But there are applications where being able to carry around buckets of energy is very helpful. It's particularly important if you need to supply power to somewhere that doesn't have power lines; carrying batteries around is likely to be difficult, and they can be easily damaged. Emergency generators in a crisis area might need to be refueled before the grid can be brought back up. Flying vehicles will probably remain fueled for a long time as well. The military is another big consumer of fuels and they strongly prefer not to be limited by availability -- world wars have been influenced by that kind of thing.

bobthepanda 8y ago

Maybe cars, but the weight of batteries is a problem for larger vehicles that need long range, like a bus, truck, or plane. For those hydrogen might be better.

tonyedgecombe 8y ago
Trams, trains, high speed rail.
- Cthulhu_ 8y ago
  There's some bus lines with overhead lines as well. The problem is of course infrastructural, and you still need truck for the last X miles. Which is where Tesla and that other electric truck company come in, of course.
- bobthepanda 8y ago
  Call me when we have transpacific or transatlantic high speed rail, or when we have a route linking Europe to Asia or Africa that doesn't take the better part of two days.
  - tonyedgecombe 8y ago
    Call me when transpacific or transatlantic air travel is carbon neutral.
nordsieck 8y ago
> the weight of batteries is a problem for larger vehicles that need long range, like a bus, truck, or plane. For those hydrogen might be better. China is already leading the world in electric busses. They work great. Busses are such good vehicles for batteries, that for some routes it may even make sense to run them with super-capacitors, with chargers embedded in the road at stops. Trucks are always going to be a problem. This is probably the area where H2 might have the best shot. The big problem, however, is that they are a relatively small portion of vehicles. If they're the only ones running H2, it's probably not going to work. Airplanes, for the most part, aren't going to be electric (although I've heard rumblings of short-range commuter electric aircraft being planned). I doubt they'll be hydrogen powered either. While they aren't as encumbered by the rocket equation as... rockets, they do feel pressure from additional weight. Additionally, the added volume of H2 compared to something like avgas (on a MJ normalized basis) would negatively affect the aerodynamic efficiency of airplanes. Probably going to stay with petroleum for the foreseeable future.
- Jedi72 8y ago
  A small percentage of vehicles by sheer number perhaps, but not by miles travelled. An average truck is working 50 hr weeks, plus commute time for the driver etc. As opposed to your average car which runs twice a day for 30 mins.
  - bluGill 8y ago
    Still a small percentage. While the average car is 30 minutes twice a day, the small percentage of cars that are not average are still more than the trucks. People on vacation can drive all day. The average car is used for a dentist appoint in the middle of the day once in a while - this all adds up to a lot of cars on the road.
- dwighttk 8y ago
  >If they're the only ones running H2, it's probably not going to work. Aren't they practically the only ones running diesel currently? Maybe Trains + other diesel vehicles is a surprisingly large percentage, but... I'd be surprised.
taneq 8y ago
I think that's backwards. Size and weight of batteries is more of a problem at smaller scales - electric motorcycles get up to around 220 miles (Zero SR) compared with electric cars at 370 miles (Tesla Model S). The Tesla Semi has an advertised range of up to 500 miles.
- dwighttk 8y ago
  >The Tesla Semi has an advertised range of up to 500 miles. I'll believe it when they ship it.
- dredmorbius 8y ago
  What's the recharge time for that motorcycle?
  - taneq 8y ago
    They're a little cagey about that (https://www.zeromotorcycles.com/charging/ https://www.zeromotorcycles.com/charging/) but it looks like it can fast charge in ~1hr and charge off a standard wall outlet "overnight".
    - dredmorbius 8y ago
      Right. I'd think a bike would charge quickly. Tesla S require 4h45m at 240V/90a, and 52 hours on 110v (prusumably 20a). https://www.cars.com/articles/2013/11/how-quickly-does-the-tesla-model-s-battery-charge/ https://www.cars.com/articles/2013/11/how-quickly-does-the-t... Both range and recover matter.
Arnt 8y ago
Some buses need long range, such as that from Munich to Baku. That's not the common case: the common case is more like line 59 in Munich, whose route is about 14km long. A lot more people take the 59 to work than take the bus towards Baku. Trucks: There are different kinds, but you can separate them into "ones that could be replaced by trains" and "ones that don't really need long range" and not be very wrong. There are exceptions, such as sparsely populated areas, but they're tautologically minor. Planes: Need dense energy, sure.
- bobthepanda 8y ago
  Presumably the bus running on line 59 doesn't run once a day; it makes lots of loops back and forth on line 59. Electric charging is not so fast that you can do it in the short amount of time that buses are required to turn around, which is usually measured in minutes. A rail network rarely has capacity for both decent freight (America) and decent passenger service (Europe). There are some exceptions to this rule, like China. But on their end that necessitated building an entirely new national rail network so that they could make room for freight trains on the old one.
  - Arnt 8y ago
    Are you saying that the 59 can't be electric because then it would have to wait empty at its two destinations for twenty minutes instead of ten before starting its next route, and that's impossible?
    - bobthepanda 8y ago
      Nothing is impossible, but it's certainly more difficult. If charging time is twenty minutes and the bus needs to be out in ten, you need two additional buses on standby to maintain the current schedule (one for each direction.) Except you need more than two, because transit agencies keep a "spare factor" of buses in case a bus breaks down or is otherwise unexpectedly available, and so you probably need ~2.2 buses for this single route. Scale this up across an entire bus network and that could easily be a hundred or two additional buses. And when you're talking about increasing the fleet by that much, you need to consider storage space for said buses. It's incredibly hard to site bus depots, because you want to minimize the distance from the depot to the start of the line, but you also have to consider the price of land and whether or not a land parcel's best use is a parking lot for buses. And this is before you consider that very few people want a parking lot they can't use as a neighbor. And so what seems to be a small problem can very quickly snowball into a large one. Public transit agencies aren't exactly flush with cash to buy a larger fleet than otherwise necessary, or land to store said larger fleet. And even if they had this money, is it best spent going electric? Money that is spent going electric is money not being used to keep the fare down or boost services.
ivanhoe 8y ago
There's a big difference between US, Canada or Australia, and say Europe regarding this. In Europe the majority of buses and trucks don't need to travel long distances. And as the population in Europe is generally much more dense soon there will be a local infrastructure of recharging stations available everywhere, so even those that need to cross long distances won't have a big problem recharging more often. The regulations in EU are really strict on bus and truck drivers, so they have to make a lot of stops and take regular breaks anyway (every 4.5 hours IIRC)
- bobthepanda 8y ago
  Buses travel long distances because they run the same route throughout the day, and the turnaround time of a bus is expected to be minimal. Alberquerque, New Mexico had the not unreasonable requirement that a bus should have a range of 442 km, but the buses that were delivered could not reliably meet that goal on a route that has some elevation gain and in a hot climate. https://www.abqjournal.com/1246094/abq-rejecting-all-byd-art-buses-switching-to-non-electric.html https://www.abqjournal.com/1246094/abq-rejecting-all-byd-art...

scythe 8y ago

For cars, sure. But there are applications where being able to carry around buckets of energy is very helpful. It's particularly important if you need to supply power to somewhere that doesn't have power lines; carrying batteries around is likely to be difficult, and they can be easily damaged. Emergency generators in a crisis area might need to be refueled before the grid can be brought back up. Flying vehicles will probably remain fueled for a long time as well. The military is another big consumer of fuels and they strongly prefer not to be limited by availability -- world wars have been influenced by that kind of thing.