Future Not Bright for Plug-In's (Honda Statement)

Honda president Takeo Fukui is completely clueless if he thinks hydrogen has a future with vehicles. The hydrogen highway is a dead end. There are way too many issues with how hydrogen would be distributed and how it is created.

The loss of electricity during the creation of hydrogen is just huge.
It makes far more sense to just use that electricity directly in a battery.

The problems with getting hydrogen to the end user might be insurmountable.
If the refueling station were right next door to the nuclear powerplant, it might work. But getting hydrogen to every corner station is not nearly as easy as the gasoline distribution system.

The electricity distribution infrastructure is already installed everywhere on the planet.

If you think batteries are expensive, what until you see the price of a functioning fuel cell in a vehicle.

 

At an auto show in Sacramento, CA a few weeks ago my wife and I took a brief ride in a Nissan SUV type Fuel Cell vehicle. The person showing off the vehicle says they are doing the hydrogen production from natural gas rather than electrolysis.

Of course, I haven't done any reading to see how efficient that is. In any case, who knows how long before a fuel cell vehicle is actually on the market.

At least we know some vehicles are already using Li-Ion batteries at a small production level.

Dave M.

 

Using natural gas to create hydrogen is just as bad as using oil to make gasoline.
They are both non-renewable fuels and both create CO2 emmissions.

Hydrogen is interesting if it can be made with electrolysis from wind or solar, but they you are wasting 2/3 of the electricity to create hydrogen. It makes more sense just to put that electricity in a battery and use an electric engine. Then much more of the overall energy is used to turn the wheels.

 

Having designed and operated various hydrogenation and syngas reactors I don't think hydrogen has much future in consumer hands anyway. Hydrogen is dangerous stuff that requires all sorts of special materials and care. It behaves oddly compared to most other gases (such as a tendency to heat up and catch fire when you let down the pressure...and you can't see the flame) and that makes it even more dangerous. I've seen the aftermath of it blowing a vent system apart at work due to an errant purge procedure (it was a subtle, understandable error by someone less versed in VLE & thermodynamics.)

I've seen the better part of city block levelled by an LPG tank in a pick up truck that went through a car wash. So no, I'm not anxious to see Bubba driving around with a large cylinder of hydrogen in the back.

 

One issue with plug-in technology is the source of the power. Many power grids today are running at their peaks, especially in the summer months. Remember the California brownouts? Adding thousands of plug-in vehicles on the grid will only tax is even more.
Now I'm not saying that plug-ins are not the answer, I believe they are. But I'm merely pointing out that, at present, they will add to the issue. Electricity is clearly the future. I would hope that solar, wind, and other venues make their respective niche quickly - before they become prematurely obsoleted.

 

Boy, talk about closed minds. I would have expected better from Priuschatters.

There is talk of H2 storage tanks that are heated to release the H2. If impaled only a very small amount of H2 leaks out. It's held in a metal matrix. Very similar technology to our NiMH batteries. These devices exist NOW. We just have to have the foresight to use them.

ANY leak of H2 goes UP out of harms way to people. As opposed to gasoline or diesel fuel, which pools underneath the car, roasting it and any people around as it burns.

Our battery charging and discharging cycle wastes lots of energy too.

There are prototype H2 fueling stations powered by the sun. This wouldn't be usable everywhere, but the technology -is- being developed.


In short, it's a developing technology, just like hybrid vehicles. Be patient, it will be getting much better, and due to the forces of environmental activists, will not be adopted widely until it meets the objective fully (low or no emissions).

 

problems with batteries is longetivity (or cost with durable battery tech) weight, charge times and capacity..

problems with hydro; storage, availability, energy ROI.

solution? if staying with chemical storage options, probably a combo hydrogen hybrid with both hydrogen and batteries.

i think we simply will not progress to mainstream without a different energy technology. so still looking at eestor capacitor options to see how that pans out. there is now several companies working on their own similar solutions...

 

That was the oil boys manipulating supply to the grid. Sounded like conspiracy theory back then, but indeed that is what Enron and the like were up to. Their traders were caught on tape explaining how they did it. The Bush administration's regulatory agency has done what it can to suppress the tapes, etc. but the material did leak out.

My understanding is that California's main problem has been NIMBY with respect to electricity generation, rather than the grid itself. Just moving one's source of electicital generation across state lines is not a viable solution.

At any rate, as I understand it more distributed production (solar/wind) should help as a considerable portion of their production coincides with peak loads.

 

Takeo Fukui's just happens to be a humble and dedicated career engineer and that alone makes him worthy of some technical respect. To be fair, perhaps a bit more respect than what other CEO's with an "arts" and "manangent" background deserve.

Regardless of inherent technical competencies, I doubt he's completely wrong since even Toyota has their own FCV's and has not declared the FCV research a technological dead-end at all. Heck, even natural Gas (straight/hybrid powerplants) appear to have future viability and Toyota is not being that secretive about it.

We have a very challenging and complex energy future ahead of us and while hydrogen, CNG or BEV are not for everyone, some of us may be better equipped than others to choose on tech over another. I would like the choice and I personally welcome any and all research Toyota ad Honda are willing to do to make it happen.


Cheers;

MSantos

 

If Eestor's and/or blacklight power's devices are actually real then we won't be seeing hydrogen ever. Even without them, I wouldn't be very surprised if battery nanotech didn't produce something at least twice as good as Li-Ion in less than ten years and cheaper too, thereby making pure EVs a massive slam dunk.

 

Unfortunately, hydrogen research brings in millions of research dollars, and that always skews good judgement, even among the most humble ... the, "well everyone else is doing it" lame mentality. Fossle fuel is limited. Why waste it when we're so near peak production? Hydrogen research has been "dead-end" since the 1970's back when researchers said, "it'll be practical in just 10 more years".

Then they said the same thing in the 1980's ... then the 1990's ... then in 2000. Eight years later, guess what? Now, why would anyone on a sinking ship want to try and build the space shuttle? Sheez! Find a life boat. That's what it's like with hydrogen compared to other alternatives like battery or natural gas. It's working stuff that we already got, that ought to get the millions wasted on hydrogen. And wasting millions on rocket packs and flying cars, when the research dollars could be best spent on existing technology is tantamount to criminal. If only because hydrogen has been a product of the oilies, like the Bush Admin for the last 8 years, that would be reason enough to abandon it.

There's plenty of good reads on the topic. Check out "The Hydrogen Hoax"

 

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, over and over until people get it! The single greatest advantage of plug in hybrids or pure electric cars is their ability to not only buy power from the grid, but to also be able SELL power to the gird when the grid needs the power, all the time leaving enough energy in the battery to go a prescribed distance. The most wasteful energy is that which the idle, spinning capacity waiting for the next load to be turned on!

The other advantage of plug ins is it creates a huge, disaggregated battery bank that allows the peaks and valleys of wind and solar to be stored regardless of the load on the grid. The grid has plenty of capacity (mostly) except for very peak loads. Having plug ins plugged in, adds a huge short time generating capacity to the grid, without having to have a number of conventional generators spinning wastefully.

Plug ins with regenerative capacity are hugely efficient in any number of ways, but mostly in the net/net amount of BTUs used to move the vehicle.


Icarus

 

Well said. Getting it so the grid can finally store energy is a huge plus!! Only EVs can do that. Bring on the smart grid and the millions of jobs it will create!!

 

If the veracity and validity of the arguments against Hydrogen as an energy carrier had any "overriding academic merit" then by consequence, it could/should be also be an indicator of a generally flawed vision (let alone judgment) on the part of the manufacturers (Toyota, Honda, and others).

I don't know about you, but I edge my bets on the people who have proven to know their stuff... and unless I can architect, design and build my own Prius, I am just another piddly engineer in NA who happens to be seriously out-classed at every turn by those who can and also happen to believe there is a hydrogen future of some kind.
To make it far easier and simpler for "nobodies" like me, it just so happens that both Toyota and Honda believe in this so-called "hydrogen falacy" (CNG and variants included) and any diffence between the two in terms of development and progress appears (for now) directly connected to their respective IP profolios. Not government grants or other external incentives as some claim. In my book their current vision is rooted on legacy and is a good bet. Thank you.

Sadly, the arguments against hydrogen tech (as well as PHEV's, BEV and CNG, etc) eerily resemble the rationale and mediocrity that oppposed and rejected the first wave of hybrid vehicles. In the end, the detractors argue their points from a single minded perspective that is often and audicioulsy self-described as "informed". Once again, the cycle repeats... and boy, is it ever fun.


Cheers;

MSantos

 

I can think of two points against H2 vehicles and one recent advance supporting H2.

First Negative Point-Virtually nobody invests in H2 vehicle technology in the private sector and a great many businesses (e.g. Ballard Fuel Cells) have left. Yet quite a few electric vehicle developments are going full speed and more are coming down the pike. (Even GM is putting it's money on the Volt and not all the Fuel Cell vehicles it has been working on.)

Second Negative Point-Most of the funding for for H2 development has come from government programs and sources. No company is going to rejects Uncle Sams money, even if Uncle Sam has picked a loser. (e.g. If you believe in H2, I have money for you..... this ensures lots of engineers who "believe in H2")

Point for H2 - The recent development of Cobalt Electrolysis Catalysts that with very high efficiencies have the potential to change the H2 generation economics.