Hydrogen Fuelled Motor Vehicles - Possible Breakthrough Technology

[Padders72]

No, I live in a small town and commute to London by train.

Most days my journey is 3 miles to the station and 3 miles back, but at a weekend perhaps a trip to a neighbouring city at 25 miles each way, and then some longer journeys to the airport at 50 miles each way. So all of those journeys are easily covered by existing EV range.

A few journeys each year to relatives at 80 miles each way might not be possible there and back on a single charge, but charging up on arrival would be straightforward.

And then perhaps a couple of >100 mile trips per year to more distant relatives or a weekend away.

So realistically an EV would be no hardship at all for me, or the vast majority of people I know. And I am certainly not going to choose to drive a £3k ICE banger over an EV for one or two trips a year.

I do think you are viewing this through your own prism. An EV may well make perfect sense for you. Indeed it does for me too but I haven't as yet made the decision to sell my ICE vehicles because I like them. You say that you wouldn't choose a £3K ICE 'banger' (my definition of banger is rather cheaper than that btw) vs a EV. Last time I looked, even an entry level EV is ~£25K (eg the MINI), with the rather nicer Tesla options starting at £40K. That might be small change for you but as I noted above, there are many for whom that is an unrealistic proposition. I think you need to flip the use of hardship, an 8-10 year old ICE car is a viable day to day option with cheap running costs for even those will little disposable income, a 8-10 year old EV, will more than likely have major battery degradation or related issues with replacement costs akin to a full ICE engine replacement, often much more. Why would someone who can get by just fine with a cheap ICE vehicle pay considerably more for something that offer them nothing extra for a greater outlay? Mine is not a decision based on the cost, maybe you too but there are many for whom it is a major consideration.

[XFool]

WARNING! Technical Pedantry Alert.

Too late - electric vehicles have stolen the lead.

It might have a use for commercial vehicles where electric isn't suitable and the commercial operator has central hydrogen filling locations (there are 13 hydrogen filling stations at the moment - are that many going to invest to supply this niche market?).

So for the average individual user, interesting but they won't be buying one.

It always irks me when I see this "Hydrogen" vs "Electric" pseudo-dichotomy mentioned!

Surely I cannot be the only one who realises that "Hydrogen fuelled" vehicles ARE "Electric vehicles"?

Similarly, I have a watch that the manufacturer claims is "Fuelled by light". Uh? Light isn't any kind of "fuel", it's a form of energy. The watch is powered by light.

That's all...

[DrFfybes]

Surely I cannot be the only one who realises that "Hydrogen fuelled" vehicles ARE "Electric vehicles"?

Similarly, I have a watch that the manufacturer claims is "Fuelled by light". Uh? Light isn't any kind of "fuel", it's a form of energy. The watch is powered by light.

That's all...

I think you need to get out more.

Oh, yeah, right.....

Paul

[AF62]

I do think you are viewing this through your own prism. An EV may well make perfect sense for you. Indeed it does for me too but I haven't as yet made the decision to sell my ICE vehicles because I like them. You say that you wouldn't choose a £3K ICE 'banger' (my definition of banger is rather cheaper than that btw) vs a EV. Last time I looked, even an entry level EV is ~£25K (eg the MINI), with the rather nicer Tesla options starting at £40K. That might be small change for you but as I noted above, there are many for whom that is an unrealistic proposition. I think you need to flip the use of hardship, an 8-10 year old ICE car is a viable day to day option with cheap running costs for even those will little disposable income, a 8-10 year old EV, will more than likely have major battery degradation or related issues with replacement costs akin to a full ICE engine replacement, often much more. Why would someone who can get by just fine with a cheap ICE vehicle pay considerably more for something that offer them nothing extra for a greater outlay? Mine is not a decision based on the cost, maybe you too but there are many for whom it is a major consideration.

The question is not what is the price difference between a new EV and a second-hand ICE, but what is the difference in monthly cost between a new EV and a new ICE. That will determine whether new owners choose ICE or EV.

And from there will flow the decisions of used car buyers, since if new car owners move to EV there will be fewer ICE to satisfy second-hand demand and those users will be forced to move to EV.

[Padders72]

I do think you are viewing this through your own prism. An EV may well make perfect sense for you. Indeed it does for me too but I haven't as yet made the decision to sell my ICE vehicles because I like them. You say that you wouldn't choose a £3K ICE 'banger' (my definition of banger is rather cheaper than that btw) vs a EV. Last time I looked, even an entry level EV is ~£25K (eg the MINI), with the rather nicer Tesla options starting at £40K. That might be small change for you but as I noted above, there are many for whom that is an unrealistic proposition. I think you need to flip the use of hardship, an 8-10 year old ICE car is a viable day to day option with cheap running costs for even those will little disposable income, a 8-10 year old EV, will more than likely have major battery degradation or related issues with replacement costs akin to a full ICE engine replacement, often much more. Why would someone who can get by just fine with a cheap ICE vehicle pay considerably more for something that offer them nothing extra for a greater outlay? Mine is not a decision based on the cost, maybe you too but there are many for whom it is a major consideration.

The question is not what is the price difference between a new EV and a second-hand ICE, but what is the difference in monthly cost between a new EV and a new ICE. That will determine whether new owners choose ICE or EV.

And from there will flow the decisions of used car buyers, since if new car owners move to EV there will be fewer ICE to satisfy second-hand demand and those users will be forced to move to EV.

Uhuh and if you are suggesting that something like 90%+ of new car sales 5-10 years from now are EVs then I would accept that the supply of ICE second hand vehicles would start to dry up under those circumstances. The thing is, I and others just don't see that happening so I think you are working to a false premise there. In any case people are perfectly happy to run around in 15-20 year old petrol powered cars so I can't see anyone being forced to do anything until ICE cars are legislated away of course as may be. Eventually.

There is no denying purely electric powered vehicles of some form or other are the coming thing (as opposed to hybrids which are a bit of a dead end IMO), I just don't think they are will be in the ascendency quite as quickly as you think unless the government upped the subsidy massively. In actual fact the subsidies are being cut and with the financial headaches we are all going to face in the next few years I don't see them coming back.

[AsleepInYorkshire]

WARNING! Technical Pedantry Alert.

Too late - electric vehicles have stolen the lead.

It might have a use for commercial vehicles where electric isn't suitable and the commercial operator has central hydrogen filling locations (there are 13 hydrogen filling stations at the moment - are that many going to invest to supply this niche market?).

So for the average individual user, interesting but they won't be buying one.

It always irks me when I see this "Hydrogen" vs "Electric" pseudo-dichotomy mentioned!

Surely I cannot be the only one who realises that "Hydrogen fuelled" vehicles ARE "Electric vehicles"?

Similarly, I have a watch that the manufacturer claims is "Fuelled by light". Uh? Light isn't any kind of "fuel", it's a form of energy. The watch is powered by light.

That's all...

Hmm ... whilst technically I think you're correct, I'd like to take some issue with your pedantry if I may please

Earlier in the thread we've already established that hydrogen powered vehicles are [most likely to be] electric vehicles.

I would also like to note I don't have a watch

AiYn'U

[AF62]

I do think you are viewing this through your own prism. An EV may well make perfect sense for you. Indeed it does for me too but I haven't as yet made the decision to sell my ICE vehicles because I like them. You say that you wouldn't choose a £3K ICE 'banger' (my definition of banger is rather cheaper than that btw) vs a EV. Last time I looked, even an entry level EV is ~£25K (eg the MINI), with the rather nicer Tesla options starting at £40K. That might be small change for you but as I noted above, there are many for whom that is an unrealistic proposition. I think you need to flip the use of hardship, an 8-10 year old ICE car is a viable day to day option with cheap running costs for even those will little disposable income, a 8-10 year old EV, will more than likely have major battery degradation or related issues with replacement costs akin to a full ICE engine replacement, often much more. Why would someone who can get by just fine with a cheap ICE vehicle pay considerably more for something that offer them nothing extra for a greater outlay? Mine is not a decision based on the cost, maybe you too but there are many for whom it is a major consideration.

The question is not what is the price difference between a new EV and a second-hand ICE, but what is the difference in monthly cost between a new EV and a new ICE. That will determine whether new owners choose ICE or EV.

And from there will flow the decisions of used car buyers, since if new car owners move to EV there will be fewer ICE to satisfy second-hand demand and those users will be forced to move to EV.

Uhuh and if you are suggesting that something like 90%+ of new car sales 5-10 years from now are EVs then I would accept that the supply of ICE second hand vehicles would start to dry up under those circumstances. The thing is, I and others just don't see that happening so I think you are working to a false premise there. In any case people are perfectly happy to run around in 15-20 year old petrol powered cars so I can't see anyone being forced to do anything until ICE cars are legislated away of course as may be. Eventually.

There is no denying electric powered vehicles of some form or other are the coming thing, I just don't think they are will be in the ascendency quite as quickly as you think unless the government upped the subsidy massively. In actual fact the subsidies are being cut and with the financial headaches we are all going to face in the next few years I don't see them coming back.

I can certainly see that in 10 years time that 90%+ of new cars will be EVs, whereas you do not. You may be right or I may be right - only history will tell.

The subsidies are decreasing because the cost of the technology is decreasing so the subsidy is no longer needed at that level. And with that decrease in costs it narrows the margin between the cost of ICE and EV.

Most new car ‘buyers’ (although nobody actually buys a car these days) care about two things, the monthly cost and impressing others. They don’t give a damn what is under the bonnet. When considering the costs, even with the reduction in fuel price (which the government will undoubtably take advantage of by pushing through a big tax increase to recoup COVID spending) the per mile cost of EVs is way cheaper than ICE. And that is before you get to the issue of ICE cars becoming politically unacceptable.

As for an 8 - 10 year old ICE car being a cheap option to run; sure if you are lucky, but that age of car is packed full of expensive electronics all waiting to go wrong. Manufacturers still build down to a lifespan and that age is past that limit for most run of the mill cars, so running one is a gamble. As for EVs suffering major battery degradation at that age - that is the belief but it isn’t backed up with evidence.

[dealtn]

Most new car ‘buyers’ (although nobody actually buys a car these days) care about two things, the monthly cost, and impressing others...

Guess I'm not "most" then as neither of those things do I care about!

[XFool]

WARNING! Technical Pedantry Alert.

It always irks me when I see this "Hydrogen" vs "Electric" pseudo-dichotomy mentioned!

Surely I cannot be the only one who realises that "Hydrogen fuelled" vehicles ARE "Electric vehicles"?

Similarly, I have a watch that the manufacturer claims is "Fuelled by light". Uh? Light isn't any kind of "fuel", it's a form of energy. The watch is powered by light.

That's all...

Hmm ... whilst technically I think you're correct, I'd like to take some issue with your pedantry if I may please

Meta-pedantry? Only on TLF...

Earlier in the thread we've already established that hydrogen powered vehicles are [most likely to be] electric vehicles.

As a (possible) point of interest, does anyone know anything (is there much to know?) on hydrogen fuelled, ICE vehicles?

I would also like to note I don't have a watch

AiYn'U

Might I possibly interest Sir in this interesting little number I happen to have about my person?

[Mike4]

Most new car ‘buyers’ (although nobody actually buys a car these days) care about two things, the monthly cost and impressing others. They don’t give a damn what is under the bonnet. When considering the costs, even with the reduction in fuel price (which the government will undoubtably take advantage of by pushing through a big tax increase to recoup COVID spending) the per mile cost of EVs is way cheaper than ICE. And that is before you get to the issue of ICE cars becoming politically unacceptable.

The cost per mile is only way cheaper than ICE at the moment because of the absence of any road fuel duty (or whatever it's called) on the leccy used to recharge EVs.

As EV penetration into the market grows and road fuel duty for the chancellor dwindles, I can't see the govt allowing that situation to persist, can you? Once we all have EVs, the lost fuel duty will be loaded onto electricity for car charging, I predict.

I've not done any calcs but my gut feeling is the amount of energy you get per £1 spent on petrol (ex duty) is WAY higher than per £1 spent on electricity, so if the chancellor loads up EV charging electricity to the level necessary to fully replace the revenue lost from the reduced petrol and diesel duty, the cost of running an EV will end up far higher than ICE, I suggest, due to the higher basic cost of electricity energy.

[Breelander]

As a (possible) point of interest, does anyone know anything (is there much to know?) on hydrogen fuelled, ICE vehicles?

There's a long history of hydrogen ICE....

Francois Isaac de Rivaz designed in 1806 the De Rivaz engine, the first internal combustion engine, which ran on a hydrogen/oxygen mixture.[4] Étienne Lenoir produced the Hippomobile in 1863. Paul Dieges patented in 1970 a modification to internal combustion engines which allowed a gasoline-powered engine to run on hydrogen.[5]

Tokyo City University have been developing hydrogen internal combustion engine from 1970.[6] They recently developed a hydrogen fueled Bus[7] and Truck.

Mazda has developed Wankel engines that burn hydrogen. The advantage of using ICE (internal combustion engine) such as wankel and piston engines is that the cost of retooling for production is much lower. Existing-technology ICE can still be used to solve those problems where fuel cells are not a viable solution as yet, for example in cold-weather applications.

Between 2005 - 2007, BMW tested a luxury car named the BMW Hydrogen 7, powered by a hydrogen ICE, which achieved 301 km/h (187 mph) in tests....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_ ... ne_vehicle

[AF62]

As EV penetration into the market grows and road fuel duty for the chancellor dwindles, I can't see the govt allowing that situation to persist, can you? Once we all have EVs, the lost fuel duty will be loaded onto electricity for car charging, I predict.

I've not done any calcs but my gut feeling is the amount of energy you get per £1 spent on petrol (ex duty) is WAY higher than per £1 spent on electricity, so if the chancellor loads up EV charging electricity to the level necessary to fully replace the revenue lost from the reduced petrol and diesel duty, the cost of running an EV will end up far higher than ICE, I suggest, due to the higher basic cost of electricity energy.

You are correct £1 buys you lots more energy for petrol than buying electricity. Google suggest 9.7 kWh per litre of petrol, so £1 should get you 25 kWh, whereas buying electricity £1 would get you around 7 kWh.

But ICE cars are not as efficient as using their energy as an EV, so a 40 MPG car is using around 0.9 kWh per mile, but Google suggests an EV uses around 0.3 kWh per mile.

So ex duty it would seem the cost of energy per mile isn't wildly different.

So I would agree that if the chancellor moved taxation onto EVs to make up for a reduction in tax lost from a reduction in ICE, the cost per mile for EVs would just increase, but it would only increase back up to the cost of using an ICE car and not "far higher".

[tjh290633]

It may be worth reminding people that motor vehicles have run on Town's Gas, which is a mixture of Carbon Monoxide and Hydrogen, during both world wars. There are plenty of photographs of vehicles with gas bags on top.

These of course were internal combustion engines, but the principles of storage and use were well understood. Before the advent of natural gas, high pressure mains and storage were neither needed nor deirable, hence the now redundant gasholders at the Oval and other places. A further factor with hydrogen is its low density, which means that it does not need the sort of enclosure called for with LPG, which is heavier than air. If it leaks, then it escapes into and disperses in the atmosphere.

TJH

[wilbobob]

You are correct £1 buys you lots more energy for petrol than buying electricity. Google suggest 9.7 kWh per litre of petrol, so £1 should get you 25 kWh, whereas buying electricity £1 would get you around 7 kWh.

My maths says that you are buying petrol at 38p per litre.

[GoSeigen]

Hydrogen is not a fuel, it's and energy storage technology.

GS

[Midsmartin]

"Hydrogen is not a fuel, it's an energy storage technology."

I think most people use 'fuel' to refer to whatever stuff you transfer into the car to make it go. I understand your point - you have to make the hydrogen somehow, possibly using the same power stations as an EV. A pedant could point out that you also have to 'make' petrol to the extent that you need an oil rig and a large fractionation plant that itself consumes lots of power, and the oil is merely a technology for storing energy that was previously emitted by the sun a long time ago.

For electric vehicles, I don't know what the situation is regarding upgrades to the national grid, substations etc to support the massive amount of power that might be needed at a motorway service area charging potentially dozens of cars at once on high speed chargers. Whereas for hydrogen, you "only" need to provide suitable tanks and pumps on the forecourt. Manufacture of batteries to provide all new cars with a decent range will also create environmental havoc where lithium and so on are extracted. Maybe distributing hydrogen has some advantages there, but that's only idle speculation.

[AF62]

You are correct £1 buys you lots more energy for petrol than buying electricity. Google suggest 9.7 kWh per litre of petrol, so £1 should get you 25 kWh, whereas buying electricity £1 would get you around 7 kWh.

My maths says that you are buying petrol at 38p per litre.

The ‘ponder’ by Mike4 was comparing the amount of energy which £1 would buy you excluding duty. So remove the VAT and Excise Duty from the cost and that is around the cost of petrol.

[XFool]

Hydrogen is not a fuel, it's and energy storage technology.

GS

Yes, really. Unless looked at in the purely, local frame of immediate use. Same way as electricity is not a source of energy: it's an energy transport mechanism. But people will still say something is "electrically powered", which, at the point it is being used, seems fair enough.

Anyway, I'll just get me 'fibre woven, body tailored, outer covering and environmental protection device'.