The EV fact thread

[SmartAmg]

People just seem so polarised on opinion, almost delighting in facts and figures to support a desire to see EVs not be a success?


I still don’t own or drive an EV, but I don’t have an issue with them either. What’s the problem?

Sums this thread up, perfectly.

 

[BTB 500]

I did see a Hydrogen car this year, a Toyota. It was the car that Toyota takes to shows. The guy from Toyota who was with the car (not an official spokesperson) said that it’s not really practical or viable for passenger cars and is more of a technical exercise for Toyota.

He said that their investment in hydrogen is for other applications - like trucks, buses, heavy plant, machinery and even marine - building hydrogen cars helps them to hedge bets in the automotive sector and create something relevant to most people for marketing purposes.

Interesting insight.

When (if?) zero emissions becomes mandatory for commercial vehicles then hydrogen is likely to be a major force - current battery technology just doesn't work for most truck/van applications. If a network of hydrogen filling stations exists to support commercial vehicles then fuel cell cars like the Toyota Mirai and Hyundai Nexo will become a viable choice.

But if diesel and/or ICE hybrid powertrains are allowed to continue in commercials (as looks likely at the moment) there will be no real need for investment in hydrogen power.

There's nothing fundamentally wrong with fuel cell technology - TFL have been successfully running hydrogen buses for decades.

Can I buy a hydrogen-powered car in the UK?

Interested in hydrogen-fuelled cars in the UK? Find out which vehicles are available and whether more are set to arrive in the future.

www.adrianflux.co.uk

 

[ALFAitalia]

Said it before....gonna say it again.......hydrogen is NOT ZERO EMISSIONS!......and it emits NOX......the nasty stuff that ULEZ zones where invented for as its not good to breathe. Takes LOADS of electricity to make too....so unless we get to the point that we have more renewable leccy than we know what to do with then hydrogen is only ever going to be a sideshow.

 

[markjay]

When (if?) zero emissions becomes mandatory for commercial vehicles then hydrogen is likely to be a major force - current battery technology just doesn't work for most truck/van applications. If a network of hydrogen filling stations exists to support commercial vehicles then fuel cell cars like the Toyota Mirai and Hyundai Nexo will become a viable choice.

But if diesel and/or ICE hybrid powertrains are allowed to continue in commercials (as looks likely at the moment) there will be no real need for investment in hydrogen power.

There's nothing fundamentally wrong with fuel cell technology - TFL have been successfully running hydrogen buses for decades.

Can I buy a hydrogen-powered car in the UK?

Interested in hydrogen-fuelled cars in the UK? Find out which vehicles are available and whether more are set to arrive in the future.

www.adrianflux.co.uk

Proper commercial vehicles can be filled with Hydrogen at their depots, and for long haul, in special location near major motorway junctions etc.

Vans and other LGVs are already available as 100% EV and with the tech improving there'll be no need to Hydrogen for these vehicles.

Private vehicles will not need to use Hydrogen.

 

[Bellow]

When ICE replaced steam, it eliminated a big problem with steam - boiler explosions. Steam boilers are a walk in the park compared to hydrogen storage tanks. But hey, just ignore the laws of physics and continue dreaming.

 

[BTB 500]

Said it before....gonna say it again.......hydrogen is NOT ZERO EMISSIONS!......and it emits NOX......the nasty stuff that ULEZ zones where invented for as its not good to breathe.

Corrected you before, gonna correct you again

Hydrogen combustion engines potentially emit NOx (depending on the exhaust treatment). But there aren't any of these on the market.

Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (all the hydrogen powered vehicles on the road now) produce only water vapour. So they are zero emissions in any normal sense of the expression.

TFL hydrogen fuel cell bus:

 

[BTB 500]

Vans and other LGVs are already available as 100% EV and with the tech improving there'll be no need to Hydrogen for these vehicles.

Vauxhall would disagree as they've already developed a fuel cell version of their Vivaro van. As mentioned 92.3% of van registrations this year have been diesel, because current battery technology is not fit for purpose in most applications (now or in the immediate future). The 2024 market share for BEV vans is just 4.8%, despite all the recent incentives/price cuts/etc.

Private vehicles will not need to use Hydrogen.

It depends on how things pan out. If filling stations were plentiful (thanks to use in commercial vehicles) then I think the long range and quick filling time (both comparable to ICE) would be attractive to many car owners. But if a future leap in battery technology significantly reduced BEV charge times while increasing range/capacity (and not affecting the cost) that would obviously change things.

 

[poormansporsche]

When it comes to commercial vehicles the fundamental issue is weight. Both hydrogen and bev weigh more than diesel. More weight less load capacity - less profit per mile travelled. Until that's sorted any alternative power source is dead in the water.

 

[markjay]

When it comes to commercial vehicles the fundamental issue is weight. Both hydrogen and bev weigh more than diesel. More weight less load capacity - less profit per mile travelled. Until that's sorted any alternative power source is dead in the water.

....unless the conventional power source is made artificially uneconomical via taxation.

 

[ALFAitalia]

Corrected you before, gonna correct you again

Hydrogen combustion engines potentially emit NOx (depending on the exhaust treatment). But there aren't any of these on the market.

Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (all the hydrogen powered vehicles on the road now) produce only water vapour. So they are zero emissions in any normal sense of the expression.

TFL hydrogen fuel cell bus:

View attachment 160487

All true.....but when most peteolheads are talking are powering a car with hydrogen they are talking about directly running an ice type engine directly on it....or even a conversion of their current car..... not a fuel fell vehicle which is basically just an EV you don't need to charge.
Overall efficency is a bit better than a petrol ice car... which are about 20 percent energy efficient..... but the average fuel cell is about 38 percent efficency. So you have a fuel cell vehicles using electricity (mostly wasted turning electricity into hydrogen) at about 38 percent efficency.....and EVs at between 80 and 90 percent! So we basically need to find three times the amount of leccy to power them. Yep... sounds like a great idea.... especially as only about half our electricity is from renewables.

Hydrogen cars won’t overtake electric vehicles because they’re hampered by the laws of science

Everyone loves the idea of H2 cars, but they come with a huge disadvantage.

theconversation.com

 

[BTB 500]

All true.....but when most peteolheads are talking are powering a car with hydrogen they are talking about directly running an ice type engine directly on it....or even a conversion of their current car..... not a fuel fell vehicle which is basically just an EV you don't need to charge.
Overall efficency is a bit better than a petrol ice car... which are about 20 percent energy efficient..... but the average fuel cell is about 38 percent efficency. So you have a fuel cell vehicles using electricity (mostly wasted turning electricity into hydrogen) at about 38 percent efficency.....and EVs at between 80 and 90 percent! So we basically need to find three times the amount of leccy to power them. Yep... sounds like a great idea.... especially as only about half our electricity is from renewables.

Planned widespread use is based on 'Green hydrogen', produced solely using renewable power. Have a read:

United Kingdom

gh2.org

Will it happen? Who knows. But the fact that there aren't many fuel cell cars / trucks right now doesn't mean it's a dead duck. As I said, it all depends on emissions targets. Zero emissions for commercial vehicles (and ships etc.) simply isn't possible with existing battery technology. So if it becomes mandatory then right now hydrogen power is the only way to do it. If it doesn't become mandatory then people will continue using diesel.

 

[Bellow]

Hydrogen doesn't store - end off. Ignoring that simple fact will create a world of pain down the road. The utter bollox I've read in the 'promotion' of hydrogen is off the scale. Try, its lack of energy density WRT volume as a benefit as it will be 'lighter and therefore easier to transport'. Yep, the hydrogen will be - but its storage tank will be 100 times heavier than its contents.

Much better would be to pursue what is being done in Orkney where green hydrogen is combined with CO2 from the atmosphere to create a liquid fuel. Liquid - at room temperature without pressurisation, storable in tanks no more complicated than a plastic milk carton and, usable in the engines that already exist and are not dependent on the likes of China for rare and exotic materials in their construction.

Hydrogen as a storage medium for surplus green electricity is folly. At best, it will have to be used as it is created in real time. Even Toyota's Mirai requires its carbon fibre be 'tested' every three years - and having been involved in pressure testing I can tell you that it is a task way beyond anything already commercially available to the motorist.

 

[markjay]

Much better would be to pursue what is being done in Orkney where green hydrogen is combined with CO2 from the atmosphere to create a liquid fuel. Liquid - at room temperature without pressurisation, storable in tanks no more complicated than a plastic milk carton and, usable in the engines that already exist and are not dependent on the likes of China for rare and exotic materials in their construction.

This still leaves us with the complexity, the high manufacturing cost, and the high maintenance cost of the 150-years-old ICE engine... so a stop-gap measure at best.

 

[Bellow]

This still leaves us with the complexity, the high manufacturing cost, and the high maintenance cost of the 150-years-old ICE engine... so a stop-gap measure at best.

Not necessarily. The ''high manufacturing cost, and the high maintenance cost'' engines you cite are a consequence of having to comply with CO2 reduction legislation on account of the CO2 being created by the burning of fossil fuels. When carbon neutral fuels are a reality that concern vanishes - making much simpler engines a possibility.

 

[markjay]

Not necessarily. The ''high manufacturing cost, and the high maintenance cost'' engines you cite are a consequence of having to comply with CO2 reduction legislation on account of the CO2 being created by the burning of fossil fuels. When carbon neutral fuels are a reality that concern vanishes - making much simpler engines a possibility.

The emissions requirements obviously add another layer of complication to an already complex and expensive manufacturing process.

Machine time for metalwork is probably one of the highest costing processes in the manufacturing world, on top of being a production bottleneck.

(I used to contract for a tier-1 manufacturer of diesel fuel pumps and injectors. The amount of work that goes into making these parts is insane. And that's even before we got to the actual engine..... )

ICE engines are a spent force, and will die, eventually, even without government intervention, simply due to complexity and costs compared to the much simpler and cheaper electric motors.

 

[Bellow]

The emissions requirements obviously add another layer of complication to an already complex and expensive manufacturing process.

Only because control of engine-out emissions was lost in pursuit of absolute CO2 reduction, NOx being the consequnce and the most difficult and expensive to curtail with after-treatment.

Machine time for metalwork is probably one of the highest costing processes in the manufacturing world, on top of being a production bottleneck.

Look closely and you'll find electric motors require machining etc. etc and in any case, the engine of the future will slash the parts count.

(I used to contract for a tier-1 manufacturer of diesel fuel pumps and injectors. The amount of work that goes into making these parts is insane. And that's even before we got to the actual engine..... )

That's the folly of diesel. That and its uncontrollable (in practical terms) NOx output.

ICE engines are a spent force, and will die, eventually, even without government intervention, simply due to complexity and costs compared to the much simpler and cheaper electric motors.

As I've said, it's time the ICE was rethought and when it is the electric motor and its absurdly heavy and chemically unstable battery will be the redundant technology.

 

[pioneercollector]

As i have mentioned before on this thread i have been running a small fleet of fully electric commercial vans for almost 10 years now and have just started to replace the the old vans ( Nissan eNV200 ) with the new equivalent vans ( Nissan Townstars ) - I have just ordered a 4th one in LWB guise to replace the 2016 eNV200 which is now approaching 100,000 trouble free miles ( 98,951 as of today ).

I have no issue at all with electric commercial vehicles and the new generation has a much more superior spec, range and charging times.

Also should mention that i currently see no benefit in replacing any of my personal vehicles as there is nothing wrong with them ( SL500, Honda C-RV diesel and a few large capacity motorcycles ) - If you want to be green then look after what you have and keep them until economically non viable to continue, which i am anticipating to be in at least another 10 years time at least!

As an aside the routes we drive daily in the process of carrying out our business duties does involve a lot of crawling along in traffic in cities and roadworks, the EV works so well for us! according to the in built van computer the average speed overall in the last 6 months has been 19.8 MPH ( and that includes the ring roads, dual carriageways and national speed limit roads we use daily! )

 

[markjay]

Only because control of engine-out emissions was lost in pursuit of absolute CO2 reduction, NOx being the consequnce and the most difficult and expensive to curtail with after-treatment.

Look closely and you'll find electric motors require machining etc. etc and in any case, the engine of the future will slash the parts count.

That's the folly of diesel. That and its uncontrollable (in practical terms) NOx output.

As I've said, it's time the ICE was rethought and when it is the electric motor and its absurdly heavy and chemically unstable battery will be the redundant technology.

I think you're looking at the wrong place.

The only reason that EVs did not completely replace ICE cars, is the battery. The EV battery is expensive, bulky, heavy, and provides limited range. If you could resolve these issues, especially the cost of the EV battery, then EVs will be much cheaper than ICE cars.

But as far as engine vs motor goes, the electric motor wins hands-down. It's cheaper to make, has far less moving parts and so more reliable by definition, and has near-zero maintenance.

Claiming that an ICE engine in a car is 'better' in any way than an electric motor, is like saying that a Rolex is cheaper, or more reliable, or more accurate, or cheaper to service, than a Swatch...... the Swatch wins hands-down on all counts. What makes the Rolex better is one thing only, and that's the ownership experience. Yes, ICE cars drive very differently, and those who like the driving experience, will continue to buy them for as long as they are available, even if they end up costing more and are a pain to service.

That was the engine... now shall we start talking abut the manufacturing cost and servicing cost of an ICE car transmission...? Just how much machining is required here...?:

It's a work of art, I agree... but why would you want one, if you can instead have a car that simply does not need it?

(And yes, I know, some EV sport cars manufacturers are about to add some form of a basic transmission to their EVs)

 

[BTB 500]

As i have mentioned before on this thread i have been running a small fleet of fully electric commercial vans for almost 10 years now and have just started to replace the the old vans ( Nissan eNV200 ) with the new equivalent vans ( Nissan Townstars ) - I have just ordered a 4th one in LWB guise to replace the 2016 eNV200 which is now approaching 100,000 trouble free miles ( 98,951 as of today ).

I have no issue at all with electric commercial vehicles and the new generation has a much more superior spec, range and charging times.

Battery electric vans can certainly work OK in some applications e.g. slow urban stop/start driving. Lead/acid battery powered milk floats were used successfully for decades, but only by dairies.

I suspect the relatively small market for current generation BEV vans is already saturated - as mentioned only 4.8% of vans under 3.5 tonnes registered in the UK this year have been electric (it was 5.2% last year). For larger vans (3.5-4.25 tonnes) the EV market share is just 0.3% (down from 0.4% last year). For HGVs the SMMT don't split out BEV registrations ... I assume the numbers are too small to make this worthwhile.

 

[Bellow]

I think you're looking at the wrong place.

The only reason that EVs did not completely replace ICE cars, is the battery. The EV battery is expensive, bulky, heavy, and provides limited range. If you could resolve these issues, especially the cost of the EV battery, then EVs will be much cheaper than ICE cars.

IF, IF, IF. Meanwhile continue with the inferior technology in the hope that it will improve.

But as far as engine vs motor goes, the electric motor wins hands-down. It's cheaper to make, has far less moving parts and so more reliable by definition, and has near-zero maintenance.

Agreed, the motor (other than the materials required for them and the geopolitical implications of that) isn't the problem. It's the battery - the lousiest fuel tank ever.

Claiming that an ICE engine in a car is 'better' in any way than an electric motor, is like saying that a Rolex is cheaper, or more reliable, or more accurate, or cheaper to service, than a Swatch...... the Swatch wins hands-down on all counts. What makes the Rolex better is one thing only, and that's the ownership experience. Yes, ICE cars drive very differently, and those who like the driving experience, will continue to buy them for as long as they are available, even if they end up costing more and are a pain to service.

Seriously? You are likening the much cheaper to build than EV ICE to a Rolex?
ICE still has an advantage over EV that is absolutely objective not subjective. Ease of refuelling. There are places in the world that will always have use ICE for that reason. A clear and incontrovertible advantage.
Another advantage is light weight. For say a sports car (or anything that needs to carry a decent payload) the EV cannot and will not be a contender. ICE doesn't require the rebuilding of infrastructure merely to cope with the weight of EVs. That's a CO2 advantage to ICE.
Admittedly these aren't issues that are the most pressing for cars, but to claim absolute superiority for EV over ICE is disingenuous.

That was the engine... now shall we start talking abut the manufacturing cost and servicing cost of an ICE car transmission...? Just how much machining is required here...?:

It's a work of art, I agree... but why would you want one, if you can instead have a car that simply does not need it?

(And yes, I know, some EV sport cars manufacturers are about to add some form of a basic transmission to their EVs)

Firstly, your assertion is contrary of the belief within the industry where it is predicted (and is already underway) that multi-ratio transmissions will be required for EVs. Why would you assume that further electric motor development in pursuit of greater efficiency and the narrowing of the rpm range concomitant with that wont require multi-ratio transmissions - just as prevailed with ICE?
Secondly, the transmission you have presented is one of the most complex - much more so than is actually required. Automated manual boxes are simple, cheap, and can fulfil most of the expectations of an automatic transmission.

But here we are in the 21st century living by the capitalist mantra of competition, competition, competition and handed regulatory advantages (the banning of the competition and considerable tax subsidies) EVs still aren't selling. Seems others aren't so enthralled by the simplicity of the electric motor argument.