Forum menu
Must depend a lot on routes and driving habits I suppose, we get well over quoted 280 miles range for driving around locally in our Kia Soul though on the motorway with loaded roof we were under 4mi/kWh (probably under 240 miles for a full charge) and that was cruising about 65mph.
Google translate as fit - https://www.motor.no/aktuelt/derfor-vil-ikke-kundene-ha-toyotas-nye-elbil-bz4x/242590
Travails of the Toyota BZ4x
Also, at the top of the page, biggest selling car in Norway ... Tesla Model Y.
It is strange that Toyota were such early adopters of this tech, are the first manufacturer to make a production hydrogen fuel cell car but don’t seem to have really got to grips with making a decent EV - by rights I would have expected them to be way ahead of the other main players.
I would have expected them to be way ahead of the other main players
Indeed. But perhaps they got sidetracked in the nonsense that’s hydrogen-powered cars and they thought BEVs would cannibalise their hybrid market?
Nonsense how? It's a technology that definitely has useful applications so why wouldn't they want to develop it?
Nonsense how? It’s a technology that definitely has useful applications so why wouldn’t they want to develop it?
Because it's incredibly dangerous and volatile.
It has the worst energy density of any of the current options, once the containment system is taken into account.
Because it’s incredibly dangerous and volatile.
It's safer than petrol and doesn't spew harmful emissions when combusted
Also safer by virtue of the fact that if it vents then it goes up (directionally) very quickly. And combusts very quickly too for that matter. Unlike liquids that have a nasty habit of soaking everything and pooling about the place.
I've worked with hydrogen in quantities that would dwarf any mobile use (power station) and so long as the proper precautions are taken it's absolutely fine.
Energy density is definitely an issue but still far quicker to recharge than batteries. I'm not saying it's the best fit for most situations but it definitely has its niche.
It’s safer than petrol and doesn’t spew harmful emissions when combusted
In what way is it safer? If a hydrogen tank on a vehicle failed, the slightest spark would ignite it and trigger an explosion way more powerful than the energy released by a failed petrol tank.
I agree that petrol is hazardous and polluting but hydrogen is not the answer.
I’ve worked with hydrogen in quantities that would dwarf any mobile use (power station) and so long as the proper precautions are taken it’s absolutely fine.
Did the containment system have to consider a collision at 70mph+?
In what way is it safer?
It disperses rapidly in air
It's not toxic
It's less combustible so needs a higher concentration in air to burn
It radiates less heat so fires are less likely to move to surrounding areas and spread
Hydrogen is a good option for some applications - main benefits being 1 - that can refuel very quickly (so good for applications like industrial equipment where it needs to be running 24/7 with no down time for recharging. 2 - it can be transported without a power network (good for remote locations) and 3 - existing IVE technology can use it without too much modification.
It’s downsides though are that it needs to be transported - so either tankers or a pipeline network, stored which isn’t that easy but the biggest one is that the overall efficiency is low - from initial electricity input (assuming solar, wind or nuclear used as an input) through production of hydrogen then turning it back into useful mechanical power is really low - something like 30% or less whereas elec transmission then battery storage is something like 80/90%+. That really matters if the future is based on electricity generated from renewables. Put another way - hydrogen va battery requires something like 3 x the initial power generation for the same end result.
Passenger cars don’t need instant refuelling - they spend most of their life sitting waiting to be used and even when a fast charge is needed then with the right infrastructure that is accomplished in similar times to those that humans need for rest breaks / toilet stops etc.
That in a nutshell it why hydrogen is likely to be just a small part of the future, and unlikely to be anything more than a niche product for the passenger car market.
Re batteries - the current lithium cells will / should be replaced in the not too distant future with less volatile, higher energy density products which are less reliant on nasties such as lithium etc. there is a lot of research going on in that field and some technologies already starting to come alto market.
Hydrogen explosions at Fukoshima:
Fukushima was as a result of uncontrolled production within an enclosed space where it couldn't be easily vented and dispersed, it's not really comparable at all to the quantities a road vehicle would be carrying.
As a chemist I'd expect you to know better.
Did the containment system have to consider a collision at 70mph+?
Crazy story - no.
Funnily enough automotive applications do, that's why they're so impractical for most use cases.
Hydrogen is a technology looking for a niche. But on cost alone it's a poor choice for domestic cars
Hydrogen is a technology looking for a niche. But on cost alone it’s a poor choice for domestic cars
Then everyone agrees!
As a chemist I’d expect you to know better.
I do know better. Use hydrogen as a fuel and you can expect accidents as with any industry, fuel or energy.
Just for a few posts I thought you were debating without getting personal, then you started again. My chemistry is good enough to understand the risks associated with hydrogen which is harder to contain than other gas fuels and forms an explosive mix with air. We can expect accidents (your own industry can claim five in my link).
You make a lot of fuss about EV fires and I've replied objectively over the years as have others. Here you are minimising hydrogen risks and I'm being objective again. This is about as objective as you'll find:
Some of the suggestions around hydrogen don't stand up to examination. For example using existing gas pipelines for transport. They simply won't handle pure hydrogen and blending suggestions should be treated with equal scepticism.
Having seen the damage a smallish amount of hydrogen, when lit, can do to a school chemistry lab sink , then I’m oot 😉
Just tried to use my first non Tesla fast charger. A brand new offering from 'Mer' ( me neither). No amount of fiddling could get it to work.
Gave up, going to find a Tesla charger on the way back home.
It's so essential these things work, it really can't be that hard. 🤷♂️
The Mer app is variably wonky to use, and certainly doesn't seem to connect as fast as some others. Been using them for a few years.
I've never tried to use a Mer station without the app. via SMS f. example
Having seen the damage a smallish amount of hydrogen, when lit, can do to a school chemistry lab sink , then I’m oot
True, but try putting a teaspoon of petrol in the sink instead, give it 30 second to vaporise then throw a match in. Stand a long way back, preferably outside the building.
@edukator it wasn't supposed to be a shitty dig, I apologise for my choice of words.
I'm not minimising the risk of anything, hydrogen does have unique issues and ideas of transporting it using existing piped infra are a pipedream (badumtish).
But for niche applications where BEVs don't work I can think of worse things to use. That's all I'm saying. It has it's uses and when compared with petrol or other hydrocarbons I'd rather have hydrogen.
Nonsense how? It’s a technology that definitely has useful applications so why wouldn’t they want to develop it?
There are sensible applications for hydrogen. Powering cars is not one of them. Spending money developing cars powered by hydrogen is not useful or desirable. As Toyota, Daimler, VAG have already shown.
Why isn’t it useful?
Hydrogen is expensive and inefficient to produce.
Hydrogen production is an extension of the current fossil fuel industry thereby potentially growing something we should be cutting.
Access to hydrogen fuelling requires building new substantial infrastructure and ongoing transport to get it where you need it.
Manufacturing hydrogen, storing it, moving it around, fuelling with it, then converting it to electricity (fuel cells) or burning it (!) to move vehicles is expensive and inefficient compared with electric vehicles.
Just tried to use my first non Tesla fast charger
My first experience of a non-Tesla charger was OK. It was a free Podpoint one at a Tesco though, just to see what it was like. First time I’d used the blue cable since I went electric in 2018.
A later experience with a charger in Cornwall was more challenging - app downloading, registering, depositing funds, then finally charging. Not as easy.
Went to a services in Wiltshire and used a modern non-Tesla fast charger. Just like the old days of pay-at-pump in terms of ease of use. Well, apart from the teeny-tiny low contrast display that was really hard to read even when I took my polarised sunglasses off. Though a gouging price. Maybe 60p+ per kWh?!
@prettygreenparrot none of which I've disagreed with.
This is all a very western-centric argument tbh, good luck finding a supercharger in the middle of Botswana or Kashmir, even Australia at that. Do we just ignore the fact that not everywhere has a reliable electrical grid or that batteries aren't necessarily an appropriate solution for anything more than a city based van?
Stop looking at it in isolation and look at it as a development project. How do you refine the technology without real world use and testing? Industry isn't going to take risks on 24/7 operation so why not leave it to consumers in suitably infrastructured areas. Think of the IP that's been developed.
I also disagree with this notion that hydrogen is an extension of fossil fuels. It can be made from any number of renewable or low carbon sources and if you have an excess then what's the issue?
Now that JCB have fully developed a hydrogen ICU plus mobile refuelling I think it’s proven to be a viable option for heavy machinery in future, plus a definite option for trains where it’s already in use. Time will tell whether it will become viable for cars but it definitely has a big role to play to play in the future.
It can be made from any number of renewable or low carbon sources and if you have an excess then what’s the issue?
Hopefully as the proportion of intermittent renewable in the electricity generation mix increases there will indeed be surplusses at some time of the day/week/year. Hydrogen production is then an option. Not as efficientt as pump storage (70-87% depending on source) or batteries (77% in cars better as just storage) but for some industrial uses an alternative to fossil fuels. I see it as being useful as a gas to be burned by industry rather than run through fuel cells.
The aluminium industry has traditionally been based near hydro and nuclear power stations. Industries reliant on hydrogen gas could be base near hydrogen production plants.
I'm sceptical about transport as it's so much easier to transport electricity efficiently around continents using cables than moving hydrogen around. In remote areas though hydrogen could be a very expensive alterantive to fossil fuels. I can't see it being widespread while there are fossil fuels to burn other than for greewashing image reasons. Like our local town that has a hydrogen tram-bus running. It makes no sense over battery busses but it's a politician's vanity project.
I
How old is your local scheme? I only ask because hydrogen, CNG etc were popular when batteries were in their infancy about 20 years ago.
But yes, I agree there are better solutions albeit not as clean. Also agree it's more likely to be used in industrial applications but like any alternative fuels where there's the infrastructure it's potentially viable or just convenient (like suger derived ethanol in Brazil).
Anyway, kicked the arse out of that one, when is someone going to just make an induction charger that can be set under a parking space?
The hydrogen buses entered service 17/12/2019. There's a PV parc and hydrogen production facility that produces 270kg a day on site on a good day. In reality they were bringing hydrogen in from the Lyon refineries (so fossil fuel hydrogen) because of issues with the plant in 2021, haven't heard anything since and I don't know what proportion of the hydrogen used is PV produced now. What is obvious is that they could power twice the number of battery buses with the same energy and charge at night during low demand from the grid having sold the PV at good price in the day.
Yeah that makes no sense. We used to produce hydrogen and oxygen on site but it was massively unreliable and eventually ditched in favour of trailering it in. Sounds like not much has changed ☹️
Electric Zoe for £150 a month + small deposit (2nd hand but pretty new)
https://twitter.com/modernheroestv/status/1684991579881140247?s=12&t=-uVSiKVTYa4YvfGrZ3WOnQ
uponthedowns
Free Member
My conundrum is which version should I be looking at.I have a Model Y RWD. Real world range 220-250 miles. Range is not a concern because the Supercharger network is just so damn good and the integration with the nav system is excellent.
This is very reassuring, thank you. I have selected a Y RWD for my next co. car based on size of the car, and most importantly, the Tesla charger network. I have kids to run up and down to Uni every few months.
Anyway, kicked the arse out of that one, when is someone going to just make an induction charger that can be set under a parking space?
Already done it.
It's going ok. It's a bugger to get the pad close enough and centred enough so the efficiency doesn't fall off a cliff.
Might be useful once autonomous parking is closer to 100% repeatable. At the moment it's very much in the "interesting experiment, but getting better fast stage". Give it 4 or 5 years and it'll be good to go.
If they’re already making an electrified motorway in Sweden you’d think a static wire-free charging system would be relatively easy? Although in fairness it doesn’t seem to be clear whether the road is going to use inductive or conductive charging.
one, when is someone going to just make an induction charger that can be set under a parking space?
Compared to physical contacts induction charging is generally a bit sh!t. Have you tried one on a phone? Slow and hears the phone up a treat.
It you’re going to do parking space charging, why not have some physical metal to metal contacts. Just set a standard re where on the underside of the car the contacts are and have something lift up from the floor.
Also re induction charging in parking spaces. This really isn’t the issue to focus on. Getting sufficient available renewable power, and then infrastructure such that this power is available where needed to change is the issue. Whether the car driver has to plug in a cable, it’s an automated physical contact or induction is just a distraction.
But perhaps they got sidetracked in the nonsense that’s hydrogen-powered cars and they thought BEVs would cannibalise their hybrid market?
Their CEO was saying the other day that since battery supply is limited it makes more sense to reduce emissions across transport as a whole to put smaller batteries in more PHEVs than large ones in fewer BEVs. If battery supply is indeed limited then he has a point.
Battery supply is limited because the motor industry has been so reluctant to invest in battery plants. No commitment and a conviction as they thought they'd always be able to lobby/bully governments into accepting continued production of ICEs. Musk (love or loath) planned his first battery plant in 2013 and it was producing by 2017, a partnership with Panasonic. Meanwhile other CEOs have been moaning about the cost and availability of batteries for a decade and still don't have a factory producing, though Renault and Volkswagen are close, this/next year.
Suspect the difference with Musk was that he didn't have any ICE car investment to also carry along. He was starting fresh with nothing but a desire to drive more EV...not an excuse for other companies not getting more heavily involved with EV, but certainly less baggage needing to be carted around.
@danstw13 - how did the roadtrip go?
We've still not 'needed' to charge away from home but are considering taking the MG4 on a bit of a road trip in Sept.
whatgoesup
It you’re going to do parking space charging, why not have some physical metal to metal contacts. Just set a standard re where on the underside of the car the contacts are and have something lift up from the floor.
With the nice side effect of forcing people to park properly as well!
mattcartlidge
Full MemberElectric Zoe for £150 a month + small deposit (2nd hand but pretty new)
£13k outright, that's not bad at all for a 2 year old car these days!
This is all a very western-centric argument tbh, good luck finding a supercharger in the middle of Botswana or Kashmir, even Australia at that.
Australian mining companies are installing solar farms because they have realised its easier to generate electricity on site than transporting fossil fuels (or hydrogen) for genneys across miles and miles of bugger all.
https://arena.gov.au/projects/degrussa-solar-project/
https://www.riotinto.com/en/news/stories/first-solar-plant
Alex - really good! Didn’t wait for a single charger on the way down. I set Autopilot at 120kph and accepted the slight range reduction. We stopped every 2 hrs and with the 220 KWh charging speed of the Ioniq 5 I was done before most people had worked out how to download apps!
I wondered how much the Alps to Morzine would kill my range, but the last 2 hrs was actually my best economy with lower speeds and all the downhill regen.
Interesting stuff ta 🙂 I'll PM you when I get a sec to ask about your IONIC as it's on my list for next year when my Kodiaq goes back...