Toyota Mirai final review and hydrogen discussion
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 чер 2023
- Get 30 day free Premium trial on ABRP by using referral code "Teslabjorn":
abetterrouteplanner.com/ref/t...
Want to sell your Tesla/EV? marcusbil.no/selge-bilen/?utm...
Want to buy a Tesla/EV? marcusbil.no/biler-til-salgs/...
Leasing a Tesla/EV? marcusbil.no/leasing/?...
Kempower make awesome EV chargers:
kempower.com/teslabjorn/
Get 15 % discount when shopping at www.bilkomponenter.no/ by using code "Teslabjorn". Worldwide shipping available (except for a few countries).
Get 15 % discount (also works on discounted prices) when ordering from Stormberg online by using discount code "Teslabjorn":
www.stormberg.com/no/kampanje...
Tesla referral program is back! ts.la/bjrn3169
Get 10 % discount on S3XY buttons for Tesla:
enhauto.com/?...
Results from my range tests, banana box tests and other goodies here:
docs.google.com/spreadsheets/...
Main folder with everything:
drive.google.com/open?id=1HOw...
My equipment:
www.foto.no/ecoflow/140865/ec...
www.foto.no/ecoflow/140866/ec...
www.foto.no/ecoflow/140862/ec...
www.foto.no/canon/117819/cano...
www.foto.no/canon/117820/cano...
www.foto.no/canon/109080/cano...
www.foto.no/sigma/106703/sigm...
www.foto.no/r%c3%b8de/138324/...
www.foto.no/lowepro/113571/lo...
www.foto.no/fotostativ/122919...
The app I use when connecting to OBD ports on most EVs:
play.google.com/store/apps/de...
ScanMyTesla app for showing battery temperature, etc:
play.google.com/store/apps/de...
/ scanmytesla
www.e-mobility-driving-soluti...
www.e-mobility-driving-soluti...
The OBD dongle I use in Tesla, Leaf, Ioniq, e-Niro, e-Soul, i3, ID3/ID4 (Android only):
www.obdlink.com/products/obdl...
My Artlist playlist:
artlist.io/mycollection/24628...
Most of my music is from Artlist.io. If you sign up for one year and use my referral link, you will get two months free:
artlist.io/artlist-70446/?art...
Donation links:
streamlabs.com/bjrnnyland
/ teslabjorn
My live channel:
/ teslabjornlive24
Teslabjørn Discord server:
/ discord
Reduce food waste and get great deals on food:
toogoodtogo.no/ - Авто та транспорт
Hydrogen has ONE purpose.
To keep you going to the gas station FOREVER.
Yep. Keeps the fossil fuel industry in business.
@@FFVoyager Uranium isn't the fossil-fuel industry.
@@FFVoyager regardless the fossil industry will not die
@@dragospahontu it will change. As demand for fossil fuels change finding an open filling station will become as difficult as finding coal to heat your house today.
@@FFVoyager :D Tell me how is EV car battery production AND how much CO2 unleash while production, the process dont pollute the air ? less then fossils ?
It is surreal to think Toyota has not figured out what Björn just talked about. It is such an obvious thing.
It's Japanese energy policy. They don't have coal, oil or gas enough for their economy. They don't like nuclear post fukashima. They are surrounded by deep water trenches they can't install offshore wind.
They have convinced themselves they can import hydrogen to satisfy their needs. Their culture means they can't tell the boss he's wrong, and so they are sleepwalking into a disaster.
Toyota was never serious about hydrogen cars. The ugly design of Miriai mrk1 made sure that it wouldn`t be a market success in any ways. Toyotas only goal was to bring uncertancy into the BEV industri, and they succeed very well on that. Allmost all Legacy automakers put their BEV projects to rest. Then Tesla model S and Nissan Leaf came to market about the same time with a proper consumer product. The The Tesla Roadster was a selling prototype, and I don`t count that in other than a finance incom for developement for the model S. Model S did a huge dent in premium segment, and her in Norway it became a great success, much because of Bjørn Nylands videos, that made everybody confident that the Model S would work as a proper Family long trip car.
So, hydrogen for cars has never really bin serious, allso because hydrogen had the initiativ to define the future the whole decade from 2000 to 2010. More than enough time to put alternatives behind if Toyota / Mercedes and others was serious about hydrogen, other than delay BEV introduction.
@@brembodream This, or, they are soo much hell bent on ICE engine, thath they can't think otherwise, and see H2 as the logical next step.
It shows how hard they fought BEV, since the begining.
“Elon Musk is right - it’s better to charge the electric car directly by plugging in,”
Yoshikazu Tanaka, chief engineer Toyota’s Mirai 2017.
@@brembodream Offcourse they are serious about hydrogen cars. They even build a hydrogen city in Japan and the government have invested alot in hydrogen manufacturing and sell the fuel. Last i heard they will invest in Ice engines that will go on hydrogen and that engine are 20-30% fuel effective against 45-60% on this fuel cell engine. So think double the cost to drive the ice engine with hydrogen.
Not only you have losses at electrolysis and the fuel cell. Imagine how much energy it costs to pressurize to 800 bar and meanwhile cool the hydrogen to -40 degrees Celsius. Hydrogen is highly inefficient...
last time i actially did a calculation my best case scenario was roughly 2kwh per 10 kwh put in. that included electrolysis, chilling compression, storage, conversion to electricity in car... so yah, compared to over 90% system efficiency in going directly to battery, and vattery to motor...
@@johndoe1909 Nice calculation. I came up to max 25% .
But I did not calculate transporting efficiency of H2 (when not produced at the place of the fuel station.)
My son, phd and working in H2 research tells me that H2 woiuld be very usefull in the steel producing industry replacing cokes there....No need for compression which increases the efficiency and no need for using fuelcells.
@@reiniernn9071 yes, steel reduction would be one atea of actual use...
@@reiniernn9071 They are starting a project in Sweden with H2 in steel production
hmmm. A battery also involves twice a chemical energy conversion and is much heavier. Fuel cells scale good, so might be a solution for semi’s/trucks, in which case here would become more of a distribution network.
When Bjorn talks through the losses, he forgot to mention that after electrolysis, you then have a load of trucks transporting the Hydrogen around the country. You have to include the inefficiency of that. Also it isn't being delivered to your house, you have to get in your car and drive to a retailing station, so a little more inefficiency in carbon, cost and time there too.
He mentions all those trucks later when talking about how h2 infrastructure doesn't scale (80 cars per station)
theoretically, you could make at the station
@Richard Labaš I suppose so. Why have just have a €2 million H2 vapouriser and compressor station when you can have an electrolysis facility that costs double that again :) Might need staffing too. Or you could just use the electricity that feeds all of that to charge up EVs directly
@@rhydlew Good point... although I am not sure I properly understood which way you were going?! I apologize for that.
Decentralised electrolysis is a plain bad idea. 1) A larger industrial-size electrolyzer is significantly more efficient than a smaller model, installed in a fueling station. 2) There are significant economies of scale in this industry like in all process industries. A plant manufacturing, say 50'000 tons of hydrogen a year will do so cheaper than one 10 times smaller... not to mention 100 or 1000 times smaller. 3) The cost of power is extremely important in the total cost of hydrogen. You ideally want the electrolyzer plant to be co-located with a large renewable power generation capacity (a solar or wind farm, both combined being best), to avoid power transportation costs and losses, which can easily triple the cost of the power used for hydrolysis. 4) Hydrogen is dangerous to handle. Correction: it is bloody dangerous! Installing the required safety measures, and having the properly trained personnel, is not without costs, but routinely handled at a large manufacturing plant... not so in a decentralize little place somewhere in the country. I will remind readers that (at least) two hydrogen-fueling stations have already blown-up, one in Norway, one in CA... thankfully to no loss of life (as far as I know), but injuries to several people and great loss of property, and that out of a total of bloody few some stations!
@@st-ex8506 you're absolutely right. Best to just the clean energy for 1 h2 car to charge 3 EVs instead ;)
according to a WTW analysis made by transportenvironmentorg in 2017, overall efficiency is:
BEVs: 73%
FCVs: 22%
ICEs: 13%
assuming both BEV and FCV energy is from 100% renewables
At the moment BEVs overall efficiency is at 80%
@@flo_h_96 Correct... from the plug to the wheel! But you have to account for the losses upstream of the recharging plug... and you end up around 75% total efficiency, from the generation device, wherever it is, to the wheel. But that is still excellent efficiency... unbeatable by any other technology!
Also the ICEs use electrofuels in this case, which is probably better thing to do if you have abundant electricity and lack of consumption.
How can one take the manufacturing of the battery / fuel cell / ice engine into that?
@@FGGiskard that's the tricky part. But pretty sure the energy to make a battery is not that much different of that necessary to make FC and tanks. For ICE, Volvo made a life cycle assessment of its XC40 gas vs electric. It will take 50k km driving to offset battery manufacturing CO2 emissions, with 100% renewable electricity for driving. However, pretty sure this, and all similar studies, use WTW petrol CO2 emission values that are the results of decades of lobbying by the oil industry. Likely representing some ideal, unrealistic situation.
Awesome review Bjorn. It’s no brainer with hydrogen for Japanese car maker as they are ganging up to develop more hydrogen car but it’s fighting a loosing battle. They should swallow their pride and pick up the pieces on ev or face irrelevance.
They can't, they have to fight this losing battle knowing it is 100% losing.
@@TerminatorMod101 A few decades ago, the Japanese government decided hydrogen was the solution and nobody seems to be able to realize that the original decision was foolish. The Japanese car industry risks being destroyed by this very costly mistake.
@@TerminatorMod101 Agreed. I think Toyota are stuck with hydrogen now until it dies a natural death. If they backed out of selling hydrogen cars now they might face a class action in the US for knowingly selling an unfit product. The potential consequence of that might be that they'd have to buy them all back.. Plus costs.
(They've sold 21,500 Mirai's worldwide, about 11,500 of them in the US. The US buyback might cost $1 billion, but the reputational cost could be five times that.)
@@londonwestman1 There are 48 Fcev in all Sweden and only companys that bought them. 5 Fcev was sold last year but 1 of this was import so i guess that doesnt count ? so 4 new sold then atleast.
Also needs to be understood, that in Japan, it's not just the car manufactures behind this, but local government which decided to support hydrogen infrastructure. They end up being the only country doing so and is destined to fail.
It's crazy expensive in Norway. Hydrogen was 9,6€ per kilo in Germany 1-2 years ago. Now, they apparently even increased it to 13,85€ as well.
That's because it's subsidized with tax money.
@@174wolf So the hydrogen would be even more expensive without subsidy.
Ultimately, this is the death blow to hydrogen. It is becoming easier and cheaper for the average person/business to make and store their own electricity to use. Why would you sell your soul to a third party so they can gouge you at will because you have to go them for hydrogen.
The real, unsubsidized price for "green" hydrogen at the pump is around €16/kg, or more! If it is cheaper, it is either not "green" hydrogen but "black" (some say "grey", but after years of experience in that industry, I don't), or it is subsidized! And if it is not genuine "green" hydrogen you would put in your Mirai, then you may as well throw it away, and buy yourself a good old gas-guzzler, because, in such a case, a HFCV is polluting MORE than a ICE vehicle!
@@st-ex8506 what about EVs? Do they also pollute more if not using green electricity?
I can confidently say than In Norway hydrogen for cars is not needed. That country has so many water reservoirs that they can "store" excessive energy production from wind and solar there.
Norway is connected to the European grid and sells much of its excess production via exports - in only a small share of its hydro facilities have pumping capacity to shift water back to reservoirs using excess power production E.g. from wind. In fact, last year due to a drought depleting it’s water reservoirs to a 20 year low, the Norwegian government started plans to put in laws to impose export controls.
@@kardy12 Agreed. Pumping stations CAN increase the amount of storage SOMEWHAT, especially if the prices are high, da owmners are incentivised for building out pumps. However, last years energy shortage really showed everyone that Norway has little capacity for energy generation, when everyone else needs that energy: prices go up, stored hydropower is consumed, and if what you have around the corner is a dry spell, Norway is not necessarily suited for dealing with everyone elses problem.
@@kompost1
I think it’s more of a question of the European grid being integrated with the price incentives designed to do the job of balancing grids when there are production shortfalls in some places. So when production falls short elsewhere, prices rise and incentivise running down of reservoirs in Norway. At the same time, if production falls short in Norway, it can plug that gap with production from elsewhere (as does also happen on occasion). So it’s less of a “dealing with other people’s problems” issue, and more the impact of having a regionally integrated grid. It makes things more robust for everyone; but at times it can have undesirable effects.
Now, limiting exports can reduce those impacts, but if you make it clear you only look at your own interests it may also reduce the willingness of other countries helping to fill gaps on the occasions when domestic production in Norway falls short. A more fragmented grid is a less robust grid.
Awesome Review. As a Product Expert for Mercedes I like your channel for really good real world testing information.
I totally agree with the Hydrogen concept. Just the convenience factor for BEV out ways the Hydrogen Fuel cell vehicles due to home charging and you don't really have to go to a fuel station. OEM's have been developing it for some time yet without proper breakthrough in efficiency it seems. Here in South Africa they are gonna start building new renewable energy charging stations and it's gonna be completely off grid. First one up and running end of this year.
South Africa better hurry up. South Africa is one of the worst coal burners in the world
I was afraid when you mentionned testing in SA from where you would get enough electric current to support even 1/2 KW per day, then you specified "off the grid". 😅
You should start your own channel, this is very interesting, what storage system will you use.. Got loads of questions!!
@@BenjaminD84 Solar panels
@@jonathanlyng3442 Solar Panels
One of the big loses in the fuel cell is the air compressor. Its basically an electric turbo charger rated around 20kW. Just like air resistance, the power input is exponentially related to air speed or air mass. So its like a double exponential relationship for road speed.
In case of cars you are totally right. But in case of stationary storage things are more complex. Although batteries always beats in round trip efficiency as you pointed to hydrogen, efficiency is not the only parameter here.
Let's see. A battery has a cost per kwh storage unit. Let's say 80 $ per kwh. You can cycle that kwh through a number of cycles, like 2000 cycles for example, before needs a battery replacement. Then, the cost per kwh cycled is 80/2000 or around 4 cents per kwh.
BUT... while the calcules are right, there is a problem. 2000 cycles is a long amortization period. If you charge and discharge the battery every day, that's like 5 years and a half. In a more realistic scenario, batteries are not full discharged and the time goes to around a decade.
Well... A decade is still a reasonable amortization period. So batteries are perfectly fine for daily storage. But... let's say you want to storage from winter to summer. That's just one cycle per year! Even in a two decades amortization limit that's 4$ per kwh cycled! Or 4000 $ per Mwh. A crazy high number. Non-competitive.
That's the reason because you need a storage that decouples storage and power. Hydrogen storage is drive by the storage tanks, while power is through the fuel cell or turbine. There is no problem in decouple, and storage is CHEAP (basically, big tanks)
Storage has some problems with escapes but scales well with sizes. Big storages has less percentage loses. While the round trip is way worse than batteries, fixed costs for tank storage is a lot better for small cycles per year, like season or reserved backup power.
There is other solutions that compete with hydrogen here, like other e-fuels (ammonia, for example), or CO2 battery, liquid air battery, flow batteries... But in this case, hydrogen vs batteries, hydrogen is the winner.
So... it depends on the case. Batteries are not ALWAYS the best solution.
In the Netherlands, some hydrogen fueling stations have started operating without government grants. The price is over €25/kg.
Did you mean €2.5/kg?
@@bjornnyland yes around 25/kg
12:00 "it feels a little bit boat"
That's just perfect 😄
Other industries (E.g. steel manufacturing) are going to suck all available green hydrogen because they try to go green too and it creates more value there.
here, have 1kg of hydrogen! Thanks for the reviews Bjorn - super useful info, especially the 1.4kg/100km at speed - explains the disparity between Toyota's claims and California users experiences. (At highway speeds = 225 mile range, not 400)
Thank you for your support :)
"Video killed the radio star" and Bjorn killed the hydrogen car🤣
As have NUMEROUS other people. Yet still, Toyota is not listening. Bye bye Toyota.
Bjorn nailed it when he said that hydrogen had its chance ten years ago, but fluffed it.
So happy for you. Nearing 300k!
You know whats funny about hydrogen? Most guys I talk to which are kind of against EV or have no idea about them (only from newspaper lol), think that hydrogen will be the next big thing that's what they waiting for. Every time I tell them that a hydrogen car is the same like EV but with hydrogentank and also with fuelcell they look like I'm out of space :D
Also here in my friends circle people still talk about E Fuels and hydrogen. I don’t know why they are all so afraid of electric cars. Humans are afraid of changes obviously.
hydrogen can be used in a bev and an ice vehicle... they probably thinking youre lying to them somehow
@@Beamer_i4_M50 Humans are afraid of changes and of things they have no clue about.
@@LoneWolf-wp9dn Yes I think your right, I think general understanding is, that it works like fossil car. You can fuel it and there is engine which just "burn" the fuel thats it :D
This is the narrative the fossil fuel companies have been pushing. And it's working.
Great review. I wasn't aware, that the hydrogen station have limitations.
I have read the manual of the Hyundai Nexo a while ago. The cas has to go every 20'000 km for maintance. If used in harsh condition, it has to every 10'000 km for maintance, where they also verify if the hydrogen system is not leaking.
What are harsh driving conditions?
- Driving in a salty environment (sea costs, salt used in winter)
- Driving with higher speed (like the German Autobahn)
- Driving often over mountain passes
- Driving often in stop and go traffic
The technology is basically unusable in Switzerland.
I drove two cars wit CNG compressed natural gas and the tanks and injection system had to be inspected every three years because of high pressure of around 240 bar. How is it with 700 bar at the hydrogen car?
That's wild. "Hydrogen Car should be driven carefully at all times".
Eventually one of these will get in a big accident, I hope it all holds up the way they say it will, but saying those tanks can take a bullet is one thing, can they take a cement truck is a very different question.
Worth noting, crash tests are often done without any fuel in the vehicle or the engine running (gasoline) by using pulleys, they only test the survivability of the chassis, not what happens to a running engine when you hit it with a bridge support. EV's are tested with their battery packs attached - not sure if they are also not running, or what the state of charge is - but this difference always bothered me.
The argument for crash testing without fuel is that the test facilities are too valuable to burn to the ground every time they smash a running gasoline engine into a concrete pillar, but then .... what are they really testing, if survivability is the key, then how the car catches fire, how the fire spreads, how long you have to get out ... these all seem like things that should be part of a safety test ... maybe I just don't know enough .... I also wonder if the slow motion airbag footage that makes us feel better about hurtling around at speed would be somewhat undermined by a test dummy family of 4 melting in the ensuing fire ....
I would assume hydrogen cars are tested depressurized for similar reasons - to protect the testing facility.
I've seen gas cars in fairly minor collisions catch fire, especially if they roll over - being upside down and on seems to go badly. I've seen a couple of EV smashes (I live in Vancouver - lots of EVs - collision is inevitable) one was pretty bad, but no fire from either, everyone was okay in all incidents, including the gasoline fires. I hope I never see a hydrogen smash, but there are a few of them around town, with 3 filling stations.
Hydrogen is CA$13 per kg in Vancouver last time I checked, at that price it must either be fossil fuelled (HTEC is, shall we say, ambiguous, about where the hydrogen comes from) or heavily subsidized if truly green. Retail electricity is $0.12 per kWh + 5% tax which would make 54kWh for 1kg of H2 cost $6.48, so it's plausible it's grid made, and our grid is fairly clean - locally hydro with some imports from coal and gas powered neighbours - BC Hydro is also ambiguous with the CO2e per kWh, and we have no realtime graphs of the mix like Australia and UK does.
Well, at least you can just ride a train...
So glad I watched to the very end. Your last little bit summed it up beautifully 😂
Yes you’ve nailed it, Bjørn. I left a long comment on the Toyota promotion video, but there are just too many fossil fuel trolls and/or people, who are ignorant of even the most basic maths, let alone physics 🤔
Excellent video Bjørn which dispels a lot of myths surrounding Hydrogen. Most people are unaware of the problems you are likely to encounter running a Hydrogen Fuelcell car, not least of which is the insane cost of the gas!
20:10 yes please, I would love a short interview with them. About experience with electric and hydrogen.
The only time Hydrogen can make some sense, is if it is impossible to adapt to charging.
If one truly need to refuel in 5 minutes, then maybe yes, but then one have to make sure the filling station is up for the task to recompress fast enough after every session too.
Then there is the extra energy cost to make hydrogen, compared to using electricity directly, making them more expensive to run by default, providing it is possible to adapt to charging.
I don't understand the argument about hydrogen for large vehicle, because they need even more energy to make the hydrogen they need.
If you think about it, the ONLY way to fill a FCEV is to go to a filling station. You have NO other option to fill up. No one can help you if you get stranded... you have to be towed. With an EV you can ask another EV with bidirectional charging to give you some juice. Or you can ask a friend with batteries to come help you... Or even many of the companies who offer such services. Even with a petrol vehicle you can carry a bucket of fuel...
The hydrogen is created from steam reforming of coal, gas or crude oil (96% of the world H2 production) which generates more pollution than burning the fossils. It is then compressed or liquefied (losses) and is transported (losses) to a fueling station. There it is stored in liquid form at −252.8°C (losses) and needs to be turned back to steam (losses)... but for volumetric reasons in needs to be compressed to 700 bars of pressure in the vehicle (losses). The fuel cell has AT MOST 50% efficiency (huge losses) and needs frequent replacement of expensive filters and components.The fuel cell looses power over time and needs to be replaced every few years. The vehicle needs specialized and regular maintenance for safety reasons (pressure vessels).
It is only promoted and advertised because the petrol industry does not want to give up it's business model - to keep you tied to a filling station and suck your pockets empty.
Thanks for talking through this topic! Electric cars seem just so simple solution compared to H2, with way less points of efficiency losses and supply chain parts about fuel that need someone´s work. Also the H2 production not really being zero emission, and possibly even a waste of electricity compared to just charging an EV directly was a brilliant point! :)
Not "possibly even a waste of electricity" ... it is "definitely a waste of electricity"! You throw away energy to even make hydrogen with electrolysis compared to using electricity direct in a BEV.
Very well done, case closed on Hydrogen it has a very limited future .
Not in the outskirts. Major touting to New Zealand government to trial hydrogen for trucking by local firms and Wellington University pioneering hydrogen with supercooled electric motors for aviation.
@@wojciechkruzel6569 Actually I am waiting how the EV charging will be solved in apartment buildings and street parking in cities. Fast charging 30 minutes at shopping center every another day is not option for me. Charging infrastructure should be installed in apartment building parking lot. People could agree more expencive hydrogen fuel when they live in cities and need only once a week take 15 minutes tanking session.
Recently read about bus h2 range extender: it's a 60kW type from Toyota which runs at 20kW because it's the most efficient operating point.
A complex solution like hydrogen will never make sense except to the producer of energy who is trying to maintain a captive market.
Simpler solutions exist, lower maintenence and cheaper. And better for the environment already too (but that is just a bonus).
Some people (like bjorn) have been saying this for years.
Hydrogen is the next "clean diesel" balderdash.
Yes,I remember a tank of hydrogen being 55 euros , so around 10 € per kg 4 years ago (2018-2019), so it was like refueling a petrol car at that time
3:40 and, if someone comes to refuel, they'll probably have to wait for the station to re-pressurize anyway. So it after all makes little difference.
I feel that hydrogen cars are trying to solve a problem that doesn’t exist, thanks to electric vehicles
Actually Hydrogen cars are trying to solve a real problem for them: BEVs will kill combustion cars.
Hydrogen is a trojan, is a way to save fosil (petrol/gas/carbon) industry because they are the ones that generates the H2 and keep you going to the gas station.
@@yoyyaesta4808 Yep, that's been exactly my thought for a looong time.
IT will be, at best, a niche market for heavy duty (semi) long haul transportation.
@@xmtxx even this business is already covered by BEV trucks
@@xmtxx and me as a farmer. I have to harvest all acers in a really short window of time and has no time for charging i am sorry to say. But i rid the diesel at least.
It solves the problem created by the BEVs.
Time is money. Mirai refueling 5 min = 600 km, Tesla S 5 min = 100 km.
@39:40 that's why we get so many Mirai video's :-) I'm glad is D O N now !
This was the most important conversation about hydrogen i saw. It cleared so many aspects how it's not yet a solution. I'll use this video an example... thank you
I wouldn't use the word 'yet' 😂
@@HoltAlex Well, the 'yet' word is there for a reason. To never say never. We never know the future. We might have a breakthrough invention one day. Even if it's really a remote chance.
@@SightsToKeepInSight I see that, there's a slim possibility if the science changes. But as we understand physics now, hydrogen is fundamentally boned. It would take a massive overhaul of our understanding of how the world works to make hydrogen feasible for this application.
Thanks for doing this review final on hydrogen. Badly needed to refute the hydrogen fanatics who continue to spout hydrogen as the ultimate. Cost and efficiency and the ability to charge my car off my solar powered roof make battery powered EVs a no brainer.
If you can get an interview with the bus company that would be awesome to to talk to them about how they figured out hydrogen isnt for them.
also the "cost" compared to the retired DIESEL fleet would be interesting as they would KNOW those numbers
Perhaps although the hydro Calif is produced as byproduct of oil refining so in the less efficient but more environmental.
I work for an international public transport company. We use electric buses over hydrogen because electric buses are cheaper for both infrastructure and fuel (energy). Hydrogen is difficult to buy / make, and therefore expensive. Range is an issue with electric buses, but we have logistical tricks around this.
once the routing is relatively fix and large parking place can be used for charging like buses, that's perfect for EVs...
said it before
FCVs are always 2-3 steps behind BEVs
The only application where it would still make sense is air transportation. But, as of now, not in 10-20 years
There is an argument that retaining the current kerosene aviation infrastructure would result in less CO2 emissions than making the switch.
As the power output of a fuel cell increases the efficiency drops, so yeah as the speed increases there will be an outsized drop in efficiency. Also the cooling requirements of a fuel cell are higher even than ICE cars so there's probably a lot of drag losses from the cooling system.
But on the flipside, FCEV don't have zero range in the cold, and you can turn on the heater without regret.
Thanks for this thorough review and your honest opinion!
Also, the logistics of H2 is a painfully expensive to get it to all the stations at scale. Then the pumps themselves need to build up pressure after someone fills their car, losing part of the speed advantage if it's busy. H2 makes sense for some industrial applications. Not for cars.
Hearing Bjorn call the previous model “fugly” cracked me up. hahahaha 😂😂😂
thanks for sending Hydrogen= BS message Bjorn
You can have 5.1kg of fuel or 175 kwh but then when you use it you will loose about 40% of it because of the fuel cell efficency (60% for the Mirai). So from 175 Kwh you can only use about 105 Kwh
It's worse than that though, as it takes around 54kWh per kg to make using electrolysis, so that 5.1kg tank took 275kWh to fill from source. You get about 76.5kWh back out, 28% roundtrip efficiency. It's really bad.
Mirai makes the Hummer EV look like an Eco car.
Regularly drive by an example of H2 bypassed in the form of a big H2 sign at the fuel station from an H2 tanking location that's been closed for a couple of years already
Another annoying thing about hydrogen is its packaging inside the car, the Mirai has a tiny boot because of the tanks, I think the Nexon has a better packaging but nothing is as convieent as the EV skateboard.
If there will be any Hydrogen cars they will be Hydrogen race cars, where 15 mins of charging is too long but for people in their every day use EVs are just so much easier.
Hydrogen race cars, what could go wrong?
Swapping a battery with a EV for racing could be done faster than refilling with hydrogen.
@@DanielZajicmuch less than with battery electric race cars.
You are probably correct, but one part of the critical thinking on Bus refuelling would be to compare charging times for electric buses compared to refuelling times for H buses. Therefore , the throughput. Maybe the economic question around the cost of installing charging points might be a little more balanced or in favour of H. That said, electricity from the grid is at the site so it needs little infrastructure, but many rapid charging buses at any one time would be shaped to what the grid can accept. Hydrogen would need delivery (presumably by truck) to a storage tank on site and this would be quite a feat to work out the CO2 and cost equation of which is better long term.
Can’t argue on costs/km though, and I until that equation changes with perhaps more uptake of H, it seems it may be an expensive fuel.
You mention the lack of interior space. One way to solve that would be to double tank pressure then halve the tank space but would the fuelling stations handle that without an expensive refit? How does the car communicate its maximum pressure? In the UK I've heard our stations are only 300psi not 700 so can't fill a mirai tank. EVs and 400/800v charging compatibility is easy by comparison.
Edit: bar not psi, thanks xmtxx2
If you double tank pressure, you'll need bigger wall, or you'd be better off storing liquid H2. Both are hell to maintain, and prevent leaks.
It's bar, not PSI. 700 bar (10 000 PSI), is already insane pressure.
@@xmtxx I didn't realise it was that high! Hope the tanks hold in a crash
How is the service interval, the nexo must go to the garage every 10.000km for leak test...
How would I fill my hydrogen car at home, or at the office? Haven’t been to any kind of charging / refueling station in over a year.
Thanks! Chipping in for the hydrogen😏
Thank you for the support. You have now paid 1 % of the hydrogen costs I had during these tests 🤣
Toyota Mirai is a classic example of how badly things can go when the management of a company has tunnel vision. In the Fully Charged podcast with Jim Farley, CEO of Ford Motor, he mentions that the Ford E 150 Lightning was one of the side projects they were working on with a few idealistic individuals. Many within Ford wanted to kill the project, but Farley refused and protected the project. Initially, they believed the car would go 100 miles. Over time, the range increased, and eventually, the project was deemed production-ready. Today, the car is a tremendous success.
When you look at how far Toyota has come with electric vehicles, it is clear that they did not have any dedicated electric car projects for a long time. The management at Toyota has unilaterally focused on hybrid cars and hydrogen cars as the only solution.
lightning is just an incredible waste of energy just to have "big car".
Used right the Lightning can be a very useful car both in work and in private use. It can provide power to a house for three days and blackout is not uncommon in many places in the US and UK.
@@mfurmyr yes, you can power your house for days, tow a yacht, transport ton of coal... however most of the time it would do the same service as huyndai kona what can with 1/3 of energy. it is common that people buy car for 1% of their trips.
"Hello, it is true that many car owners do not need such a car, but what about those who require it for their job? This includes farmers, carpenters, masons, and many others who need to transport various goods and perhaps require the power it can generate. It could be electricity for cement mixers and much more. In Norway, everyone who ordered the car had to provide a justification for why they could purchase the car and not buy it for speculative resale purposes."
@@romansitner8345 I agree it is a waste of energy but I feel it is an important step towards full BEV pickup trucks. I live in north america and the reality is the culture here is very pickup truck based. You will never get big adoption (here) of BEV if you don thave pickup truck BEV's.
Elon said like 10 years ago it's a foolcell, it will never be as good as EV.
Elon isn't always right. But he is on this case. Maybe he shouldn't be cheaping out on removing Lidar from his vehicles and thinking cameras will do everything.
battery benefit you can balance the renewable based grid- ie charge when surplus electricity and discharge when shortage of electricity, you cant do this with hydrogen
Thank you again Bjørn for this great video, and I completely agree with your opinion on hydrogen tech!
I heard from a friend in Japan that in Japan they use nuclear power to create hydrogen and they already have more than a 1000 hydrogen stations. The electricity grid in Japan is not so good, so they can not support millions of EVs. They think hydrogen is better solution for them. In Nordic countries electricity grid is much more robust, so EVs are better here.
It's not a matter of robust grids or not, Nordic countries have low population densities, Tokyo to Osaka is one big city of 100 million people.
The math doesn’t work out. If they don’t have enough energy for batteries then they don’t have a fraction of the energy for hydrogen cars since the efficiency is so much lower for hydrogen. Both will draw power from their nuclear plants. Hydrogen just will require multiples more.
very informative video , Thanks Bjorn 😀
In the end its about cost (for private or public transport and - most of all - for logistics). Something that requires 3-4 times as much power to make per kilometer of mobility utility can never be cheaper. And that part is limited in a hard way by *physics* ...not open to "maybe we'll figure something out"
That's the long and short of it.
Perfect wrap up.
The train has left.
Biggest problem with hydrogen is it IS the smallest atom. It can go through other bigger molecules. So no matter how perfect the seal is, hydrogen will always leak. And in an oxygen rich environment it not just flammable but explosive! A battery fire will look like a candle flame compared to a hydrogen fire.
Also high pressure itself can be explosive.
The other problem with hydrogen is that you can only store so much of it in any given space. Meanwhile energy density is increasing in batteries all the time. You can get more energy to ever smaller batteries. So even though you only have so much space in an EV for batteries, that same space will hold more and more capacity year on year as battery tech evolves. But a 5.2kg hydrogen tank will still only hold 5.2kg of hydrogen.
And the tanks on the Mirai has an expiration date noted on the fuel door too. I guess you need to pressure test the tanks after 10+ years. I forget what that lifetime is. But I wonder how much that test would be since there aren't many hydrogen cars on the road. And if they do need to be replaced, that would be expensive too.
You're wrong about hydrogen fires/explosions. It is near impossible to keep Hydrogen from escaping if there is a leak, and if there is a fire, the flame will go straight upwards.
Batteries are orders of magnitude more dangerous in terms of fire. But that still isn't a problem.
When is a video with the Tesla Model Y RWD in Norway planned??
The biggest downside is you can't refill a hydrogen car at home. I know someone with an EV and he can recharge his car for something like £6 overnight. He doesn't have a home battery or solar panels so if he did He could bring that price even more down.
It is _technically_ possible to generate H₂ from the home tap water and electrolysis! But energy intensive to do so.
@@beyondfossil For that very reason it's flawed from the get-go. Electric is easy to get hydrogen is not easy.
when I think about future implications of hydrogen powered vehicles i see potential in transport. Currently a fully electric bev truck costs anywhere from 2-3x the cost of a regular one. So if the actual vehicles are cheaper to produce the relative high cost for fueling can be offset.
Either way looks like everything in the future will eventually be more expensive if commercial transport is getting more expensive due to vehicle and fuel costs.
Simple solution mate. Don't buy a truck for commuting around like many currently do to haul their fragile ego's around. Trucks will always be thirsty and expensive no matter what the energy source is. Sure some people actually tow things often with their rigs but very few do outside business stuff.
@@samusaran7317 I‘ve meant a commercial 40t trucks for example. They cost as fully electric bev version up to 3x the amount. No business is going to be able to afford 3x the vehicle cost for a 3rd of the range and usability.
Hmm do I build 30 high tech HPCs or one H2 fuel pump ..
Do I provide energy for a simple technology or do I provide energy for tech that only two OEMs offer...Hmmm
Engineering Explained has a great video on the complexity of hydrogen engines. Far more complex than BEVs.
The Mirai uses a hydrogen fuel cell, not a hydrogen engine. The fuel cell generates electricity from hydrogen to power what is otherwise basically a small-battery BEV. Hydrogen combustion engines do exist as well, but that's a whole other thing! But yes, basically right: fuel-cell EVs are far more complex than battery EVs.
@@Reason077 the Hydrogen combusion as explained in the Engineering Explained video really is a non starter. You cannot even park that car indoors. Maybe however for busses and transport trucks but then you have the issue of highly pressurized tanks in vehicles that do get into high velocity accidents.
Until this year I was agnostic on the hydrogen fuel question - but Bjorn you've nailed the issue - the economies of scaled up hydrogen just don't add up. For transport Hydrogen is out.
For private and short distance transport*
@@FGGiskard ANY road transport... with possible rare exceptions. Even trucks going long distances are limited by legal hours for the driver. And that limitation makes recharging an electric truck perfectly feasible, while the driver rests. The only exception would be team operations (2 drivers), which exist in North America, but not in Europe.
@@st-ex8506 1. What do you mean they do not exist? Of course they do
2. Europe and the USA are a small part of the world
3. Even if they did not exist regulation in Spain for example establishes 45 minute rest every 4.5h impossible at the moment (you’d need chargers of nearly 1.2MW)
@@FGGiskard In Europe, team operations are basically non existant. I know it from my neighbor, who is a retired trucking company CEO. The reason is simple: a second driver is more expensive than the time value of an immobilized truck. In the USA, they exist but are rare. Maybe, they are more common in low salaries countries?
Drivers must indeed rest 45 mn after 4.5 hours. But after 9 hours, the day is over, for both driver and truck, and you have plenty of time for recharging.
Tesla’s Megachargers for trucks are not 1.2 MW, but still 1 MW. So, in 45 mn, the truck’s battery could still be recharged about 50%, enough for another 4.5 hours of driving. Having said this, I believe that the Megachargers will be destination chargers, rather than on truck stops, where such level of fast-charging is not really needed.
Finally, the majority of trucking operations are not long-distance trucking from say, Andalusia to Germany, but regional or local distribution, or going from distribution warehouse to another one, always within the famous 9-hour driving limitation.
Very good analysis. And you didn't mention that storing hydrogen for long periods takes energy. As a gas it leaks out of everything, but liquified, it takes energy to keep it in liquid form as it has to be kept extremely cold. You mentioned the speed of an ICE car versus a hydrogen car. Of course, a BEV (a Tesla Plaid) holds the speed record around the Nurburgring circuit - not exactly slow. Thankyou for an excellent video.
The losses are extremely low, a normal user does not even notice this
Ockhams razor: A Proton is 1600 times heavier than an electron. That makes electricity much superior to Proton chemistry.
Ok: Lithium has its chemistry too, but it stays at the battery, it doesnt come from far far away as the Protons for en FCEV
And just work vs thermal energy i think seals it... work was always the better option but the engineering wasnt there... thermal energy will always be fundamentally universally inefficient
Oh and another big issue... filters... you need really good filters for the O2 that goes into the fuel cell... so you will have to change them often... another procedural headache which bevs will never have
Filters get rid of particles, but nor of polluting gases (CO. SO2, NOx, ...)... and some of them poison the fuel cell catalyst. Optimally, fuel celles should be fed pure hydrogen, not ambient air!
Professor many thanks….excellent presentation
Thank you for all info.
Bjorn, been following you on EV's for year.s You always present high value information. Concerning the hydrogen cars, there was a report issued over the last 6 month that drove the nail into the heart of the hydrogen car industry. I am shocked that the likes of Toyota missed this point. The report was issued by a top US university and indicated that the combustion of hydrogen is not clean. The chemical product produced by hydrogen car is not only toxic it can never be reduced in nature like CO2 can. Trees and CO2 work together to create more oxygen. But the chemical product produced by hydrogen combustion can not be reduced in nature. That means to reduce co2 we will create a byproduct of combustion that will exasperate an already bad C02 situation. Sorry, I don't recall more about that report, but you are the man that can expose this folly, that will further endanger mankind.
My hometown Hamburg has been trying out all sorts of alternative powered busses on one specific city route for a couple of years. Turns out hydrogen busses had roughly twice the TCO of electric busses. They are also much more expensive in purchasing. So the decision went to electric busses and a handful of hydrogen for the longest routes.
Costs are coming down. Hamburg bought a bunch of hydrogen taxi's recently. Electric busses make sense in some cases, in other cases not so much.
@@splendidsystems still at it I see. Costs are going up, especially green hydrogen fuel costs - there goes your alternative facts again - unless the hydrogen is made from fossil fuels, it will always be 4 to 10 times more than battery electrics cost to run, and no cheaper to buy when you include the filling equipment.
Hydrogen bus projects are cancelled almost as soon as the ribbon has been cut.
Whistler, BC Hydrogen Bus (Ballard Systems / Air Liquide) cancelled a few years after Olympics were over - high operating costs were cited - the hydrogen was trucked across Canada from the east coast!
The city of Montpellier, France, cancelled its order after doing some math, realizing hydrogen was 6 times more expensive than batteries.
German city of Wiesbaden (cancelled after 1 year, single €2.3m filling station broke down)
HysetCo (Toyota / Air Liquide / Total) aimed to have 10,000 H2 taxis in Paris, actual number: 100
French manufacturer Alstom - 27 hydrogen trains promised, 6 delivered, zero working when it's cold outside.
When you follow up from the optimistic 'hydrogen headlines' that go with a new project and look for the results after a year or two, it's always the same story, the costs, the infrastructure, the machines themselves, even when it works, it doesn't make economical sense. Paid off bureaucrats leave in disgrace, public money is wasted, and then they either go back to diesel, because they wasted the federal green grant on hydrogen (which I think is the point) or they buy the battery buses they should have in the first place. Occasionally they spot the mistake before it happens.
www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-transit-s-90m-hydrogen-bus-fleet-to-be-sold-off-converted-to-diesel-1.2861060
www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/hydrogen-powered-trains-struggle-with-winter-weather/
www.hydrogeninsight.com/transport/chaos-and-massive-disruptions-worlds-largest-hydrogen-train-fleet-suffering-teething-problems-in-germany/2-1-1403982
Alberta is the next dumb hydrogen bus / hub project generating headlines right now, I expect it's demise in around 2 years, and I expect it to be fossil hydrogen.
The goal of the hydrogen industry, is not to make zero emission vehicles, but to sow doubt in the minds of prospective EV drivers, "headlines not hydrogen" is the mantra.
in 2009 Translink (Vancouver BC Canada transit operator) did a MASSIVE fuel test with a long list of different busses
and Vancouver is/was home of BALLARD power systems a huge fuel cell maker
Translink is NOT running H2 busses but some BATTERY busses and DIESEL + over head "trolley" busses
If Björn would have made the test in winter, it would have been maybe more interesting. Because this car can also coldgate, and the problem of fuel cell freezing is quite serious. Probably consumes a lot more in winter to keep that thing in the "don't die pls" condition.
Fuel cells are being used in space where the temperature is close to absolute zero, ie -270°C.
Losses in fules cells are mainly heat. When gold starting fuel cell losses can be much higher before it reaches operating temperature.
Another point about hydrogen feasibility. Hydrogen doesn't come out from the socket at home. So this means it HAS to be transported at least some way, no matter how close by it is produced (the production process needs to be secure enough so it cannot happen in just any place). Hydrogen storage is WAY less "efficient" than for example diesel storage. So storage needs to be refilled muhc more frequently (about 6 times for requently than diesel storage). That means 6 times more trucks transporting hydrogen on our roads. There is no point whatsoever switching to hydrogen.
One more point. The fuel cell used in the hydrogen cars requires very very clean air. That means it requires very very effective air filtering. That means it has very short service period (needs to be serviced about 10 times more frequently than an EV). Also the fuel cell (which costs same as a EV battery) doesn't have long life span (this may impove in the future).
It’s doomed because where do I get it? I already hate going to gas stations, why would I want to go to a hydrogen station? I can charge at home while I sleep, so I really don’t care how long charging takes.
I can see a role for hydrogen in long haul aircraft - energy density has to be moderated by the mass of tanks.
I can see a role in grid scale long term storage - but it’s a storage of last resort because of round trip efficiency (but again, only using energy which would otherwise be curtailed).
Efficiency will improve as more people and companies get involved.
@@splendidsystems do the laws of physics change when more people and companies get involved?
I was surprised that the tanks ate up so much interior space. You did mention about possible hydrogen use in airplanes. Where I can see that there will be weight savings for fuel, but I wonder what kind of added space would be required for a long haul plane?
You can fly planes with hydrogen, if you have another plane following it to transport the H2 tanks
Hydrogen is stored 700 bar pressured gas in Mirai. Gargo vehicles and planes will use hydrogen in liquid form which allows higher energy density.
@@user-hb8sq6ce9u Meanwhile you consume at least 30% of the energy content to cool it down to -253°C
Great job. Very helpful.
It's basic physics - it's not even hard. H2 is systemically inefficient compared to battery electric.
Electricity -> Battery -> Motor
vs
Electricity -> Electrolyser -> Pipeline - > H2 compression and storage -> H2 Decompression -> Fuel Cell - > Electricity (back to where we started) -> Motor
I wonder which pathway has lower losses overall? Hmmmm
The electricity network is built, it just needs a capacity upgrade
The H2 network is not built
Not to mention safety concerns, packaging in vehicle etc etc.
Nice review about the car. Hydrogen basically solves the problem of long term energy storage. Wind and solar deliver electricity depending on the time of day, weather and season.
Unfortunately, the grid can not store energy, but only transport it. That means that in the winter and night time, we are still dependant on very dirty energy sources, and in the bright summer, the grid is absolutely stressed out with surplus energy (even litterally destroying equipment).
For the imbalance of night and day, battery storage is a good solution. But right now most EV's are charged based on demand, not supply. Also, a vehicle to grid system is not present. So every bit of energy used by BEV's in winter time increases the use of dirty old coal power plants, which typically have an efficiency of about 30%. Gas power plants go up to 60% but have their limits in reuse of waste heat. Nuclear is said to output 0 emission, but nucluar waste is a lot harder to handle for nature than CO2.
So if we want to get rid of dirty power (yeah, diesel is dirty too), we need a way to store all of the solar power long enough for cold dark and maybe not so windy days and nights.
This is where Hydrogen works. The current natural gas storage is easy to convert to Hydrogen storage, and all but the oldest gas pipes can easily transport Hydrogen without significant leakage.
And of course the clean production of Hydrogen will have losses, mostly as heat. But because there is no CO2 or danger, this production can be done anywhere, eliminating long distance power transport and it's losses and problems, and also reusing the heat, let's say for warm water usage such as large swimming pools, homes and industrial use.
In winter time, the old gas power plants can be converted to run on hydrogen. The losses will still be there with only 60% efficiency, but with zero CO2 output (only hot steam), they can also be built closer to homes for reuse of this heat.
And realistically speaking Hydrogen systems have a lot of room for improvement. Advances are reported almost weekly, and efficiency is getting beter. An Australian company claims a 95% efficiency breakthrough, which puts it very close to lithium battery storage, without the self-discharge problem of batteries. In most places we will need to store summer energy for more than 6 months, and at a scale that no battery supplier is going to achieve in the next 100 years. Battery storage is nice for hours to days, but for months, it would be insanely expensive and big.
At the moment, electricity prices on the energy market are lower than 0 at peak hours, and this situation is getting worse as solar panels get installed with no real use at this scale. So producing Hydrogen with this energy (using a battery buffer) can be done very cheap and help maintain the grid stability, as well as get us prepared for winter time.
So, what does all of this mean for transportation? Well, i think the BEV will have a dominant position in personal transportation where it makes sense. If you have time to charge, it can be much more efficient. But in terms of trucks, where time is money and delivering over long distances fast has most business value, the Hydrogen system makes sense. It takes up extra space, but weight is much better. Also, if you can refuel in 5 to 15 minutes, the truck can run so much more. A truck can haul a lot of weight, but there is little value in delivering mostly empty truck batteries.
The EU is committed to Hydrogen, and stations are getting built at a nice pace, and reused natural gas pipes and filling trucks can take care of distribution. This means you could rely on Hydrogen filling stations just as well as you can on diesel and gasoline. Sure you get some losses, which may or may not double the zero CO2 emissions.
The nice thing about Hydrogen cars is the tiny Lithium battery it needs for peak power production. Lithium mining is very bad at the scale needed for transportation, but i have hope that Sodium batteries will replace them soon, as CATL and BYD (the Lithium battery leaders) are promising comparable power to LFP.
So, do i think Hydrogen is better? No, but we need it. Handling BEV's is a big nightmare for the energy grid as massive supercharging is moving toward to flux capacitor numbers.
Powering heat pumps, industry (steel production, refineries) and heavy transport will be first. But if we do have huge amounts of clean cheap Hydrogen stored underground and fuell cells get better and cheaper, it may be a matter of time before personal transportation with this surplus makes more sense, especially in densely populated areas where home charging is just not an option or travel distances and business hours make a BEV a hassle to work with. Building and powering a million chargers is the goal in the Netherlands, but the people working in the grid are calling it an impossible feat for the next 10 years.
@@logitech4873 hydrogen can be stored just like natural gas. In the Netherlands we use salt caverns with compression.
Nuclear waste needs to be stored safely for thousands of years. The meeting to settle on a localion is planned for the year 2100, when those now in diapers can discuss it. Except for Tritium, which is just diluted and dumped in the rivers and oceans.
@@logitech4873 In a world with high fluctuations in supply and demand the business case for nuclear is getting worse every year. Reactors do not handle throttling very well unless you just bypass the turbine and waste the surplus of energy. Storing energy from nuclear power in Hydrogen has also been passed as "green" under pressure from the government of France, which relies heavily on nuclear power.
As for safety, i can only say that what happens in the powerplant, stays in the powerplant. Unfortunately i can not elaborate due to an NDA.
Its better to use metanol for fuel cells. Tanks is smaller, like a fossil tank.
So here we have the hydrogen car, so many keep telling me, they are waiting for.
In reality it‘s just an expansiv EV with many disadvantages.
A test in winter might be of some interest too.
Thanks Bjorn for clearing that issue up about hydrogen cars and buses, its proved to be a very interesting video, will share!! Hope you break even on the costs to make this video, otherwise sheeeet! 😬 BUT what happens if the car catches fire, I don't think I would like to be anywhere near it when than thing goes up, it will make a BEV look like a sparkler!
Very good video and congrats to almost 300k subs!
All the points I'm repeating for years. Hydrogen is good for local storage or applications where you can burn it directly like the metal industry. In everything else it has to low efficiency.
Depends. If we are serious about replacing fossil fuels with renewables in our electricity grids, we will need to build a lot of excess capacity to ensure we have enough power during demand peaks. That excess renewable energy that would otherwise be wasted can be captured using hydrogen electrolysis for virtually zero marginal cost. At that point, the relative inefficiency is less relevant.
@kardy12 that's what demand mgmt. and batteries are for.
@@timseytiger9280 are huge batteries the best way to store excess energy? Is that more sustainable in terms of CO2 than H2?
@@kardy12 That is true, so maybe not only local storage but also grid storage. But on the other hand does the power generation become more and more decentralized which benefits local storage.
@@FGGiskard One idea I've heard which sounded pretty interesting was to use old car batteries for grid storage. Because they loose less and less capacity as they age, they would last pretty long. And at the end you could still recycle them into new batteries. But I don't know the CO2 const of batteries vs H2. One thing is for sure though, that you would need less energy generation capabilities with batteries due to the higher efficiency. So currently, where we have a grey energy mix in most countries, battery storage is better I think.
Probably a mix of all of the above as far as energy for cars
If fusion power ever becomes a common, everday thing, hydrogen and helium will be the likely byproducts of the power plants that generate it. So maybe these kinds of cars will be economically viable a few decades from now, as the power plants will have a strong market to sell their waste to.
This video will be interesting rewatch after 10-15-20 years.
No. It won’t. Hydrogen is dead. At least for private cars.
@@Beamer_i4_M50May be. Vlog will be interesting on one way or another.
I don't know if Hydrogen will play a big part in transport. But Industry still uses Hydrogen and new uses such as clean Steel by moving away from coal means Green Hydrogen needs to replace all current uses going forward.
Hydrogen is used in many industrial processes
Nearly all of the hydrogen consumed in the United States is used by industry for refining petroleum, treating metals, producing fertilizer, and processing foods. U.S. petroleum refineries use hydrogen to lower the sulfur content of fuels.
Hydrogen is probably necessary to replace fossiles in some sectors like heavy industry, steel production etc. where you can't use electric power directly, afaik. So there could be scaling effects and it might get cheaper.
Also it could be used where weight is important, as long as the effective energy density is significantly higher than batteries, as maybe in airplanes. Not sure about ships.
And of course with renewables the produced power is fluctuating so maybe at times of low consumption and high production h2 could be produced cheaper. I don't know if h2 could effectively be used as seasonal storage to be used in gas/heat power plants during winter or whatever, if there is no other option.
Time will show. For cars it is a dead end though, I think.
Simply put , to get an FCEV charged,you need to take electricity,produce the hydrogen,then Transport that hydrogen(with a diesel truck) to a filling station(which can only store very little hydrogen) to put in a car,in which the hydrogen gets converted to electricity (via the H2 fuel cell stack) to run the EV motor it has .. oh as a bonus water comes out the plastic tailpipe
Yes! Well put!
What does it cost you to drive a Tesla 3 at the most expensive charging station compared to the Mirai? Euro or US$ per 100 km ?
Liquid Hydrogen is a difficult storage fuel as there needs to be an expensive refrigeration plant to keep it at -253 deg C. Also compressing the Hydrogen gas is also an expensive and inefficient process to store it at between 10,000 to 12,000 psi. This is the wrong solution going forward.
Bjørn, you are 100% right!
He may be right today, he will be wrong in the future.
Why wait 6 seconds plugging in your EV at home, when you can make a trip to a retailing station, and stand around for 5mins next to your car, and pay £/€/$100 for a tank ....like the good old days 😂 Good try oil companies, but sayonara
The only modes of transportation where I see a future for H2 are:
- Upper stages of launch vehicles, although more and more stages are switching to Methane or even RP-1
- Long-range airplanes, since batteries will be insufficient for a long time (need at least 2-3kWh/kg on the pack level to be remotely feasible)
I think everything else is futile and a waste of money and time.
@@logitech4873 Not yet outside of tests. Hydrogen or e-fuels, I'm not sure. Batteries are out of reach for a long time (long-haul it's mostly the energy density which is an order of magnitude short, and for short range it's the cycle count. Short haul planes run up to 100k cycles in their lifetime, so batteries if cheap enough should do AT LEAST 10k-20k))
CNG was cost-competitive with BEVs, but it still failed. H2 will fail for the same reasons, plus the price.
there are battery electric commuter trains available today (stadler). that technology is also imoroving steadily with better chemistries coming on line. i can actually only see hydrogen on container ships or similar. and frankly, not rven there....
Exactly!