32 grams per FC stack in a Toyota.Bystander said:However, there hasn't been enough Pt mined and refined in all history.
It's already been tried, and the attempt already placed a $billion battery swap company (Better Place, Inc) in the ground. As it stands the large batteries require building the car around the battery. Tesla's model S for instance uses almost all the undercarriage for battery. Standardizing the battery package means standardizing all the cars, which won't happen.phans said:It seems that a solution to all the long recharge times that batteries have, at least for automotive applications, is to standardize on two or three battery sizes/capacities with standardized connections (physical & electrical), and then build cars that can use them. If this is done smartly, it would then be possible to build automated battery-swapping-stations. You'd drive in, stop for a few minutes, and drive out with a fully charged battery. You'd receive a credit for any unused charge on the battery you drove in with and pay for the net gain. Taken a little further, a smart gasoline provider (Exxon/Mobil, Shell, ...) could add a battery-swap bay to its existing gas stations. In this scenario you wouldn't even own a battery, you'd just pay to use one. Like swapping propane tanks for your gas grill, except the automotive battery swap could/would be automated. This needs no new technology, just smart use of what we already have. Forget your battery-charging-station network, Tesla, build automated drive-thru battery swapping stations!
True but storage is a solvable problem. H2 distribution still has no feasible solution, nothing remotely close.gmax137 said:storage of hydrogen is more difficult than gasoline.
mheslep said:32 grams per FC stack in a Toyota. https://agmetalminer.com/2015/10/21/platinum-rises-on-toyota
Just comparing the specific energy of gasoline versus batteries shows that you would have to store batteries weighing a hundred times more than the gasoline weight. A typical gas station might have 3*10,000 gallons of gas at 6.3 lbs/gallon. That would be about 100 tons of gas. So the energy-equivalent battery storage would be about 10,000 tons. And that is just the replacement for an average gas station, not the big interstate stations.CraigHB said:That would be a solution to the charging time problem. It's not without some logistical issues itself.
Vanadium 50 said:Well, if we decide we want to reserve hydrocarbon use for elites to fly their private jets to Davos and decide how much the little people need to sacrifice, well that's not a technological decision.
FactChecker said:Just comparing the specific energy of gasoline versus batteries shows that you would have to store batteries weighing a hundred times more than the gasoline weight. A typical gas station might have 3*10,000 gallons of gas at 6.3 lbs/gallon. That would be about 100 tons of gas. So the energy-equivalent battery storage would be about 10,000 tons. And that is just the replacement for an average gas station, not the big interstate stations.
Batteries can be re-charged.FactChecker said:Just comparing the specific energy of gasoline versus batteries shows that you would have to store batteries weighing a hundred times more than the gasoline weight. A typical gas station might have 3*10,000 gallons of gas at 6.3 lbs/gallon. That would be about 100 tons of gas. So the energy-equivalent battery storage would be about 10,000 tons. And that is just the replacement for an average gas station, not the big interstate stations.
jack action said:So 180 batteries per stall with, say, 4 stalls per station you need 720 batteries. At 1300 lb/battery, it's about 400 tons only.
Too late now for the "near future". I suspect that the point that the energy industry is different from the semiconductor industry is about to become quite clear.CraigHB said:There's the possibility of some breakthrough that doubles it again in the near future.
Where for batteries? There are no other 35 GWh/yr battery plants under construction, funded, or even under serious planning as of some months ago (i.e. a site purchased ...). It might well happen, but it can't happen quickly. It has to be this way. One can't sink several billion dollars into a factory design to produce a product lasting ~ 10 yrs and have it become obsolete in a couple years. If this was commonly the case, the several billion dollars of funding would never materialize.CraigHB said:but there's plenty of competition.
Even if it is cheaper to run? Simple calculations show that buying a battery every few years + the cost of electricity is pretty similar to the cost an empty fuel tank that must be filled every week. The problem is that you must pay the whole battery in advance. Also, if you have an accident, you lose your «investment».CraigHB said:I know I can't afford one and I certainly don't want to pay half of the car's sticker price for a replacement battery every three to five years.
jack action said:Simple calculations show that buying a battery every few years + the cost of electricity is pretty similar to the cost an empty fuel tank that must be filled every week.
CraigHB said:Though sticking it to the evil oil companies would be some compensation
Vanadium 50 said:Why are they evil? You just said yourself that you are going to make choices that are bad for the environment for economic reasons. Is what the oil companies do any worse?
That's outside the scope of the thread, but please have a look at the actual statistics, because what you believe turns out to not be true:CraigHB said:I think my situation probably reflects the average state of peoples' finances. The cost of living has been going up a lot faster than salaries for many years now.
russ_watters said:B∞a¿=úغ=xá''8X@ç"∑⁄1‹êYCalibri1‹êYCalibri1‹êYCalibri1‹êYCalibri1» êYArial1‹ˇºYArial1¥ˇêYArial1¥ˇºYArial1J¥ºYArial, Albany AMT, sans-serif1H†êYArial, Albany AMT, Helvetica1¥ˇêYArial1‹êrCalibri1h8ºrCambria1,8ºrCalibri18ºrCalibri1‹8ºrCalibri1‹êrCalibri1‹êrCalibri1‹<êrCalibri1‹>êrCalibri1‹?ºrCalibri1‹4ºrCalibri1‹4êrCalibri1‹ ºrCalibri1‹
êrCalibri1‹êrCalibri1‹ºrCalibri1‹ êrCalibri1‹êrCalibri"$"#,##0_);\("$"#,##0\)!"$"#,##0_);[Red]\("$"#,##0\)""$"#,##0.00_);\("$"#,##0.00\)'""$"#,##0.00_);[Red]\("$"#,##0.00\)7*2_("$"* #,##0_);_("$"* \(#,##0\);_("$"* "-"_);_(@_).))_(* #,##0_);_(* \(#,##0\);_(* "-"_);_(@_)?,:_("$"* #,##0.00_);_("$"* \(#,##0.00\);_("$"* "-"??_);_(@_)6+1_(* #,##0.00_);_(* \(#,##0.00\);_(* "-"??_);_(@_)§"Yes";"Yes";"No"•"True";"True";"False"¶"On";"On";"Off"]ß,[$¨ -2]\ #,##0.00_);[Red]\([$¨ -2]\ #,##0.00\)‡ıˇ ¿ ‡ıˇ Ù¿ ‡ıˇ Ù¿ ‡
Algr said:If it needs to be said, it needs to be readable.
But, the battery technologies develop so fast and we'll see batteries that can be charged faster than the li-ion batteries and more denser in energy than the li-ion batteries in near future. And by then there would be no reason to even worry of hydrogen.DrClaude said:As far as I know, that's basically it. You lose in efficiency by using hydrogen as an intermediary, but the idea would be that it would be as easy to use as gasoline. The main problem is that is way more dangerous than gasoline.
Nobody is considering using H2 as a compressed gas. The way it would work in the real world is storage of H2 in a metal/organic framework, where the pressures and temperatures involved are a lot less than brute force gas compression. Anyway, if compressing was found ultimately to be the only viable alternative, the tanks would not have to be 2 inches thick. I worked with a company that made small cannisters of Xenon gas at 12,000 PSI and they were not very thick, nothing like 2 inches thick. Still, I think solid state capture of H2 is how it will be done, a lot safer than simple compression.jack action said:Please do, I know nothing about hydrogen and I love to learn.
See, I never thought about that and turns you are right. Will go to bed a little bit more knowledgeable tonight.
After a simple search, apparently they can go well below the 1500 lb mark rather easily. From 45 kg (@145 L) to 215 kg (@55 L) for 3 kg of H2 (130 mi range) and from 90 kg (@320 L) to 222 kg (@200 L) for 7 kg of H2 (435 mi range). The source is from 2002 and there seems to be room for improvement.
Yeah, they don't say how much they cost ...
litup said:Anyway, if compressing was found ultimately to be the only viable alternative, the tanks would not have to be 2 inches thick.
The differences between Hydrogen and Xenon are relevant. H2 is a tiny molecule that works it's way into the solid matrix of the structural containment, so plastic liners are commonly used. Also, if the tank is to used outdoors, not in a temp/humidity controlled lab, and where it's frequently charged and discharged, thermal insulation might be required.litup said:...the tanks would not have to be 2 inches thick. I worked with a company that made small cannisters of Xenon gas at 12,000 PSI and they were not very thick, nothing like 2 inches thick.
Well I have this question . Speaking of globally , wouldn't a large amount of energy be wasted in the transportation if hydrogen powered vehicles are used due to the energy loss that happens when separating hydrogen by water , (speaking of the purest form of extracting hydrogen- using renewable energy to separate hydrogen from water )mheslep said:Theoretical faster charging batteries need i) a connection that can provide a faster charge, and ii) a system to reject the heat of the charge. Tesla's chargers are already 120 KW, so perhaps a 1 MW grid connection at all those stations, which is expensive.
A 10 gal/min gasoline pump delivers chemical energy at 20 MW. I don't see people connecting 1MW charge cables to their cars, which dissipate 50 KW of heat while charging.
Well it needs an expensive totally new infrastructure which can make that very unpractical.Algr said:And then another runner in the race is road transmission: Store small amounts of power in the car, and once you get on the highway, draw electricity from wires in the road.
Extraction of hydrogen from water using renewable energy locally would solve the problems related to the purity and transportation. Only a water supply is needed.mheslep said:True but storage is a solvable problem. H2 distribution still has no feasible solution, nothing remotely close.
H2 efficiency from well to wheels is much lower than that of pure electric vehicles. Regardless, EVs remain slower to charge and have less range than h2 or liquid fuel vehicles.HyperTechno said:Well I have this question . Speaking of globally , wouldn't a large amount of energy be wasted in the transportation if hydrogen powered vehicles are used due to the energy loss that happens when separating hydrogen by water , (speaking of the purest form of extracting hydrogen- using renewable energy to separate hydrogen from water )
HyperTechno said:Extraction of hydrogen from water using renewable energy locally would solve the problems related to the purity and transportation. Only a water supply is needed.