Proving hydrogen is more than just hot air

i don't doubt the possibilities of fuel cells. i'm more concerned with the politics. But keep political commentary out of the open forums.

 

Was this ever in doubt? It takes a "Sports Scientist" and a "Master of Physics" to prove this? I hope they weren't taking this road trip on grant money.

This is a new Hyundai built fuel cell vehicle, not something flubbered together in the Nutty Professors garage.
So they took a road trip in a Hydrogen Vehicle? And were surprised it worked? This hardly qualifies them for Charles Lindberg like sacrifice or ground breaking discovery.

I would kind of assume Hyundai put the vehicle through those paces and more before they put their badge on it along with a big decal that says "Fuel Cell".

I think Fuel Cell vehicles face challenges as far as marketability, and infrastructure to support widespread usage. But I don't think anyone doubted they work.

 

I'm also concerned with the cost of the infrastructure, and whether anything built now would be usable by the time the cars feasible as a ICE replacement.

 

agreed, it's difficult in an environment where the government wants greener cars, to spend a lot on a promise that might be 20 years away or more. tough situation.

there should be continued funding for all r&d, but not lopsided, and certainly way more toward the grid and renewables.

 

Great marketing, now when was the last time anyone has wanted (or even been legally allowed) to drive 1500 miles in 24 hours in any vehicle, irrespective of propulsion power?

 

To Texas?

 

i know a bunch of canadiens who make it from montreal to ft myers in 24 hours every year, eh?

 

I hope that is with more than one driver.

If the hydrogen infrastructure is built up before renewable ICE fuel PHVs becomes available.

 

Legally? Sure, why not? Lots of places with 80 mph speed limits, in the US. That is only 19 hours of driving. That leaves 5 for bathroom, food, fuel, breaks. Germany, yep faster speeds. Just refill and turn arround, don't go anywhere and its all doable.

Could you do it in a Tesla? I'd probably drop to 70 mph (21.5 hours driving at speed) and build 3 battery swaps with 250 miles between, on both ends and a second driver because there isn't that much time to sleep. Range is 295 at 65 mph, and 250 at 75 mph, going 70 you can probably have 250 miles between swaps. Go there back, and there again and you have 1500 miles. Hot or cold slow down and get there ;-)

 

On the contrary: A Tesla supercharger can add 170 miles of range in 1/2 hour. Start full, recharge 7 times, drive 72 MPH average. Done. Is there anyone who thinks that is impossible? Anyone want to lend me their model S so I can prove it?

 

I'm not sure what you prove in a push up contest. The clarity proved that given enough money a car company could put out a polished fuel cell vehicle. The tesla roadster proved the same thing for bevs, but was much closer to commercialization.

Now the hyundai is redoing what the clarity did, because that was so 2009. Given fueling infrastructure the clarity could do this too but then again who cares. Can the hyundai fcv do the trick the volt did?
Stick Shift's Cross-Country Chevy Volt Test Drive (with Video!) | Vanity Fair
Well no not until someone builds the fueling infrastructure and that again, is pretty precomercial. It costs much more than anyone is willing to pay today, maybe with some tech breakthoughs.

What about the tesla? Again it is expensive, but not as bad a value as a fcv.
They Drove A Tesla From LA To New York In A Record 58 Hours 55 Minutes
Looks to me like tesla built the infrastructure so sure with longer breaks you can do it. But really if you can afford a tesla why not fly, or rent a more appropriate vehicle. Going on 500 mile trips really is no problem. This took 29 hours for 1500 miles, 5 more than the hyundai fcv, but of course it was a road trip, not simply a circle between hydrogen stations that worked.

Maybe in 2035 we will be here with fcv and hydrogen infrastructure. But right now you can bop station to station in southern california. IIRC there should be 44 by the end of the year in California at various stages of being usable, toyota thinks 15 will be able to fill up a vehicle fast at the end of the year, from 2 today. By the end of 2021 carb thinks maybe 86 stations, my guess is 70.

 

yes legally, i meant that from a safety standpoint. for example truck drivers are banned from driving this long without a significant break in between. also in their example it was made to seem like they drove non stop station to station. if you did this in a tesla at faster speeds you could absolutely do it.

tell me next time you do this so i can stay off the road…

 

So says CARB, but looking at it as getting the car back up to full range as quickly as possible it's fast refueling.
The entire point of the fast refuel bonus credits was to get a zero emission car, that could be refueled as quickly as an ICE on into the hands of the car owners. Supposedly.
Many people don't know how to change the oil in an ICE. To them the details don't matter on how a car gets back up to full range is done. All they care about is getting back on the road in under 5 minutes.
Tesla's battery swapping did this, but to get the bonus credits now, people have to use it. That is stupid if the goal is have fast refueling to make it easier for people to adopt these cars. A BEV owner just has more choices on how to fill their car, and CARB is punishing the technology for giving those choices.
If home filling FCEV becomes available, it won't be fast and likely longer than charging a BEV, but CARB won't take those 3 extra ZEV credits away.

 

It looks like the "viking and scientist" were probably pretty safe in their proof of concept. The "scientist" tells the viking to slow down at the beginning to 120 kph (75 mph), at the end they are trying to speed up to pick up the miles and we see the speedometer over 170 kph (105 mph) which is safe on the autobahn if traffic permits but not in the US.

As I said in a different comment if you built swap stations (tesla estimates $500K each) which are not economic you could do it in a tesla. The model S 85d has more range (epa) than the hyundai tucson fcv that they used, the 90d should even be better. The mirai could go faster and still make the fill ups.

Again we shouldn't get too hung up. FCV while not being economic today can do these stunts. As the "viking" said in the little piece, they are talking about practical 15-25 years down the road as a gasoline car replacement. There just isn't infrastructure today to do any type of real long road trip, and neither of these guys claimed it, or that you couldn't also do it in a plug-in.

Better place demonstrated that the concept though technically fine, was economically not ready. The tesla wrinkle is still not ready econmically, but who knows if there are millions of big batteried plug-ins what might happen in a decade. The tesla economic model is that the first station you swap at also needs to be the last station you swap at in a trip. You can move batteries between stations. If you don't swap back at the end of the trip there will be a surcharge if the battery you ended up with has more capacity than the one you started with. If it has less you simply lose that capacity. With initial adopters so far, drivers simply want to wait 30 minutes and get the refill for free, then spend $50 and get out faster. That $50 really is $100 as you need to swap back again to your recharged battery. So $100 for an hour or two of your time, most people are going to use the free superchargers and ignore battery swap and save that $100. Many in gasoline and fcv would make the same decision, which makes me think home refueling and free long trip refueling might be better features than fast refueling.

Technically charging a battery is very different from pumping liquid gasoline into a car which is very different then pumping high pressure chilled hydrogen gas into a tank. Charging a battery inside a car versus outside is pretty much the same thing. Swapping charged batteries for dischared ones, then charging later, is somthing many of us have done. The problem is that extra battery and swap cost money but is more convient. I used to do that on my phone before I bought an iphone, now I have to carry an extra battery to charge the battery but can't swap for the same convince. Either way you are adding fuel whether hydrogen, electricity, or gasoline.

Its 5 bonus fast refueling credits now not 3, they changed the credits when they

 

Got cut off there.
So do FCEV get a total of 11 then? I was thinking they got 6 plus 3.

 

Long range is 4 credits, + 5 fast fueling credits is 9zev
tesla gets 4 long range credits
leaf, i3, etc get 3 (100 mile range old epa city) credits.

tesla with swap potential, and fcv with fast fueling potential used to get 4 + 3 = 7 zev credits. Honda and mercedes earned these. Tesla sold these bonus credits and invested them in the X, gigafactory, and model 3. Without the credits I think its down to 1 battery swap station, which will stand as proof of concept, unless someone shows a need.

The new fcv hyundai tucson, mirai, gen II clarity will get 9 until 2018 when its supposed to end, but Carb in their 2015 report seems to want to increase funding, and I'm betting continuation of the 5 credit bonus.