3 ms·

FCEVs will end up being far cheaper than BEVs. Hydrogen production doesn't not have the same uptime requirements that directly electrification requires. It's qu

by Hypx_ 5y ago

FCEVs will end up being far cheaper than BEVs. Hydrogen production doesn't not have the same uptime requirements that directly electrification requires. It's quite likely that green hydrogen will be cheaper than grid electricity pretty soon. I think people will find out that make green hydrogen is easy, but green electricity is not.

phicoh 5y ago
That is unlikely because cheap hydrogen can be used to stabilize the grid. So with green hydrogen, the grid consists of cheap green energy or electricity from hydrogen. In areas with lots of solar, you can charge your car during the day and forget about more expensive electricity during the night. In contrast, a FCEV always pays a higher price because hydrogen needs to be produced from green electricity and the fuel cell also has significant losses. So with hydrogen you can never be lucky.
- Hypx_ 5y ago
  If you're making grid electricity with hydrogen, it will be as expensive or more so than something that directly uses the hydrogen. You also are going to be forced to charge during the day, the exact opposite of how people use their EVs. Finally, hydrogen will make up the majority of power production for those long stretches of low wind and cloudiness. In all likelihood, grids will be built around the existence of hydrogen storage, not the other way around.
  - phicoh 5y ago
    People will quickly figure out what is cheaper. And that is using electricity as it is generated. Second best, if it is predictable, store electricity in batteries. Most likely a home that has enough solar panels, can store energy temporarily in a house battery and then transfer it to a car cheaper than having the car run on hydrogen. Any FCEV has a battery that in theory can be charged from the grid. So FCEV owners are also interested in charging their cars at work. Making grid electricity with hydrogen is expensive, but is only need for a fraction of the time. So on average you come out ahead. There may in the future be an interesting difference in regions. Some regions can combine hydro, wind, solar, etc. and have cheap electricity. Other regions are not so lucky.
    - Hypx_ 5y ago
      Which is going to be hydrogen, not charging from the grid, for long stretches of time if not all the time. The cost of solar panels plus batteries will add significant cost and make it less cost effective than large-scale production of hydrogen. Not to mention that only a minority of people will have access to this. Plug-in FCEVs exist. They can react flexibly to energy costs if hydrogen suddenly gets more expensive. They make more sense than a car that only runs on electricity. If by "fraction of the time" you mean upwards of 100% of all grid energy for weeks on end, then yes it is a fraction of the time. In reality this is such a large factor that it will drive hydrogen costs to below grid electricity for very long periods and over large areas. Some communities might even think of getting off the grid and generate all electricity from hydrogen directly. In such cases hydrogen will always be cheaper. While it will make sense for some communities to stick with direct electrification, this is going to be the rare case where dependable renewable electricity exist. It will also likely force BEVs into driving "islands", as it would not make sense to drive a BEV outside those specific regions. Ultimately, BEVs will end up mostly as commuter cars intended for short range trips. This will also drastically reduce the problem of battery e-waste and eliminates the need for vast numbers of fast charging stations.
      - phicoh 5y ago
        I think you underestimate how much green hydrogen is going to cost. Yes, it would be great if green hydrogen is going to be as cheap as petrol today. No need to worry. However, that is just very unlikely. Just basic physics how much energy you need to put in. Solar panels are cheap. Batteries are cheap if you can use them every day. Indeed not everybody has a drive way. Weeks on end sounds very dramatic. But the important number is what fraction of the year. Combining solar and means that a very large fraction of the year there will be green electricity. If you need to produce large amounts of green hydrogen, then you need to massively overbuild green electricity production. And this increases the fraction of time that there is green electricity. With respect to islands of BEV. That is a bigger risk for FCEV. It is very unlikely that a BEV island would have a hydrogen infrastructure. On the other hand, in an area dominated by hydrogen, it is still cheap to provide a few fastchargers. Maybe the elctricity won't be cheap but the charger setup is not that expensive, so you can expect them on major highways. Which will make FCEV the car for commutes. In any case, I'm curious which country will actual role out a fine grained network for green hydrogen. I very much like to know what green hydrogen will cost 'at the pump' if there are no subsidies.

by Hypx_ 5y ago

phicoh 5y ago

That is unlikely because cheap hydrogen can be used to stabilize the grid. So with green hydrogen, the grid consists of cheap green energy or electricity from hydrogen. In areas with lots of solar, you can charge your car during the day and forget about more expensive electricity during the night. In contrast, a FCEV always pays a higher price because hydrogen needs to be produced from green electricity and the fuel cell also has significant losses. So with hydrogen you can never be lucky.

Hypx_ 5y ago
If you're making grid electricity with hydrogen, it will be as expensive or more so than something that directly uses the hydrogen. You also are going to be forced to charge during the day, the exact opposite of how people use their EVs. Finally, hydrogen will make up the majority of power production for those long stretches of low wind and cloudiness. In all likelihood, grids will be built around the existence of hydrogen storage, not the other way around.
- phicoh 5y ago
  People will quickly figure out what is cheaper. And that is using electricity as it is generated. Second best, if it is predictable, store electricity in batteries. Most likely a home that has enough solar panels, can store energy temporarily in a house battery and then transfer it to a car cheaper than having the car run on hydrogen. Any FCEV has a battery that in theory can be charged from the grid. So FCEV owners are also interested in charging their cars at work. Making grid electricity with hydrogen is expensive, but is only need for a fraction of the time. So on average you come out ahead. There may in the future be an interesting difference in regions. Some regions can combine hydro, wind, solar, etc. and have cheap electricity. Other regions are not so lucky.
  - Hypx_ 5y ago
    Which is going to be hydrogen, not charging from the grid, for long stretches of time if not all the time. The cost of solar panels plus batteries will add significant cost and make it less cost effective than large-scale production of hydrogen. Not to mention that only a minority of people will have access to this. Plug-in FCEVs exist. They can react flexibly to energy costs if hydrogen suddenly gets more expensive. They make more sense than a car that only runs on electricity. If by "fraction of the time" you mean upwards of 100% of all grid energy for weeks on end, then yes it is a fraction of the time. In reality this is such a large factor that it will drive hydrogen costs to below grid electricity for very long periods and over large areas. Some communities might even think of getting off the grid and generate all electricity from hydrogen directly. In such cases hydrogen will always be cheaper. While it will make sense for some communities to stick with direct electrification, this is going to be the rare case where dependable renewable electricity exist. It will also likely force BEVs into driving "islands", as it would not make sense to drive a BEV outside those specific regions. Ultimately, BEVs will end up mostly as commuter cars intended for short range trips. This will also drastically reduce the problem of battery e-waste and eliminates the need for vast numbers of fast charging stations.
    - phicoh 5y ago
      I think you underestimate how much green hydrogen is going to cost. Yes, it would be great if green hydrogen is going to be as cheap as petrol today. No need to worry. However, that is just very unlikely. Just basic physics how much energy you need to put in. Solar panels are cheap. Batteries are cheap if you can use them every day. Indeed not everybody has a drive way. Weeks on end sounds very dramatic. But the important number is what fraction of the year. Combining solar and means that a very large fraction of the year there will be green electricity. If you need to produce large amounts of green hydrogen, then you need to massively overbuild green electricity production. And this increases the fraction of time that there is green electricity. With respect to islands of BEV. That is a bigger risk for FCEV. It is very unlikely that a BEV island would have a hydrogen infrastructure. On the other hand, in an area dominated by hydrogen, it is still cheap to provide a few fastchargers. Maybe the elctricity won't be cheap but the charger setup is not that expensive, so you can expect them on major highways. Which will make FCEV the car for commutes. In any case, I'm curious which country will actual role out a fine grained network for green hydrogen. I very much like to know what green hydrogen will cost 'at the pump' if there are no subsidies.