The EV fact thread

[Bellow]

For those who still believe hydrogen is the future.

Hydrogen ICEs Out of the EV Race - Lubes'N'Greases

Cars with hydrogen internal combustion engines won’t to pose a threat to the dominance of battery electrics, dashing the hopes of automotive lubricant blenders that the future of transportation will still need engine oils.

www.lubesngreases.com

“This means that for a passenger car to run on hydrogen combustion and achieve a range comparable to a petrol/diesel ICE, it would need an enormous storage vessel,” according to IDTechEx. A hydrogen ICE car would need a cylindrical tank four times the size of a gasoline car’s tank, which can be any shape, to match range.''

Toyota has its Mirai in its museum - clear enough?

 

[BTB 500]

For those who still believe hydrogen is the future.

Hydrogen ICEs Out of the EV Race - Lubes'N'Greases

Cars with hydrogen internal combustion engines won’t to pose a threat to the dominance of battery electrics, dashing the hopes of automotive lubricant blenders that the future of transportation will still need engine oils.

www.lubesngreases.com

“This means that for a passenger car to run on hydrogen combustion and achieve a range comparable to a petrol/diesel ICE, it would need an enormous storage vessel,” according to IDTechEx. A hydrogen ICE car would need a cylindrical tank four times the size of a gasoline car’s tank, which can be any shape, to match range.''

Toyota has its Mirai in its museum - clear enough?

Nobody other than JCB thinks hydrogen combustion is the future.

Hydrogen fuel cells (as used for 20 years now) are a different matter. If the requirement for zero emissions commercial transport (coaches, trucks, ships, etc.) doesn't get scrapped then AFAIK it's the only currently workable solution. Hence all the companies working on (or already selling) larger fuel cell vehicles.

 

[ALFAitalia]

Others think otherwise....

Battery Electric Vehicles

Battery-electric trucks promise zero emissions, making them the ideal solution for specific transport applications like inner-city distribution. As a result, sales of fully electric trucks will increase.

www.daf.co.uk

Our electric truck range

We’re here to make your shift to electric as smooth as possible: from helping you choose the right electric truck to planning range and securing deliveries.

www.volvotrucks.com

Unveiling our fully electric UK fleet vehicles | Amazon Freight

As part of our goal to achieve net-zero carbon by 2040, we now have 5 electric HGV as part of our UK fleet. Read about the great impact this will have.

freight.amazon.co.uk

Driving electric trucks

Driving Electric trucks : leading the charge with Renault Trucks

www.renault-trucks.co.uk

 

[BTB 500]

Others think otherwise....

Of course battery power will work for some large vehicle applications, but not all of them. E.g. you can successfully run electric buses on short stop/start urban routes, but long range inter-city motorway use would be out of the question with current EV technology. So how would (say) National Express go fully zero emissions, if this was made mandatory?

Single Deck bus | Zero Emission Vehicles | Wrightbus

Explore the future of sustainable transportation with our Single Deck bus from Wrightbus – a pioneering solution in zero-emission vehicles. Experience eco-friendly journeys without compromising on efficiency and comfort.

wrightbus.com

It seems BEVs don't even work that well as smaller commercial vehicles, with just 4.8% of <3.5 tonne registrations this year (to end of August) being BEVs and only 0.3% in the 3.5-4.25 tonne sector. Significantly down (in terms of both market share and numbers sold) compared to the same period last year:

LCV Registrations

SMMT is the country’s primary source of data on the motor industry. Click here for the SMMT Van and Truck registrations data

www.smmt.co.uk

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

So called “Electric roads” could be an answer to BEVs for large vehicles and long distances.

There are variations on the theme, overhead power cables to charge whilst driving (like a tram), underground power cables to charge whilst driving, and underground rapid chargers where vehicles stop (like traffic lights).

All are expensive and require significant infrastructure changes/upgrades, but anything and everything on a very large scale is expensive.

 

[BTB 500]

So called “Electric roads” could be an answer to BEVs for large vehicles and long distances.

There are variations on the theme, overhead power cables to charge whilst driving (like a tram), underground power cables to charge whilst driving, and underground rapid chargers where vehicles stop (like traffic lights).

All are expensive and require significant infrastructure changes/upgrades, but anything and everything on a very large scale is expensive.

Reminded me of this

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Reminded me of this

View attachment 161152

It’s a good idea, they could remove the wings altogether to save weight. They could also run a larger number of smaller planes to improve service and distribute the load to reduce the foundations required for the pilons. Here’s an early prototype:

 

[Bellow]

Of course battery power will work for some large vehicle applications, but not all of them. E.g. you can successfully run electric buses on short stop/start urban routes, but long range inter-city motorway use would be out of the question with current EV technology. So how would (say) National Express go fully zero emissions, if this was made mandatory?

View attachment 161142

At that storage pressure, the weight of tank(s) for 50kg of hydrogen is 5 tonnes. More than 1/4 of the vehicles weight. 5 tonnes of potential payload denied. In haulage, that matters.

 

[BTB 500]

At that storage pressure, the weight of tank(s) for 50kg of hydrogen is 5 tonnes. More than 1/4 of the vehicles weight. 5 tonnes of potential payload denied. In haulage, that matters.

An equivalent battery powertrain (the only other zero emission option) would be much heavier though. The EV version has a 567 kWh battery (same gross vehicle weight), but only 40% of the range (less in winter, of course).

 

[BTB 500]

At that storage pressure, the weight of tank(s) for 50kg of hydrogen is 5 tonnes.

Are you sure about that?

The tanks in the Mirai hold 5 kg of hydrogen at twice the pressure (700 bar), and weigh 88 kg. So 10 of those would hold 50 kg at 700 bar for a weight of 880 kg ... that's a long way off 5000 kg?

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Electric shock – Fiat halts production of 500 EV | Autocar

"Deep difficulties" in European EV market mean the electric city car won't be built for four weeks

www.autocar.co.uk

 

[markjay]

Electric shock – Fiat halts production of 500 EV | Autocar

"Deep difficulties" in European EV market mean the electric city car won't be built for four weeks

www.autocar.co.uk

If Western governments won't incentives it via tax cuts and grants... it won't happen.

The idea of ICE sales ban is just the government's way of making it happen without paying for it.

 

[Bellow]

An equivalent battery powertrain (the only other zero emission option)

Nope.
Bio and synthetic fuels are carbon neutral - which is the objective.

would be much heavier though. The EV version has a 567 kWh battery (same gross vehicle weight), but only 40% of the range (less in winter, of course).

That's the case for bio and synthetic fuels right there.

 

[Bellow]

Are you sure about that?

Yep.

The tanks in the Mirai hold 5 kg of hydrogen at twice the pressure (700 bar), and weigh 88 kg. So 10 of those would hold 50 kg at 700 bar for a weight of 880 kg ... that's a long way off 5000 kg?

The Mirai tank is made of carbon fibre (the usual figure quoted for its weight is 95kg). Steel tanks can take 350 bar (if the bus had a carbon fibre tank it wouldn't restrict storage pressure to 350 bar). Industrial gas bottles weigh 100kg for every 1kg of contained hydrogen - but I concede that might be at 175 bar - in which case the tare could be a bit lighter at 350 bar. But that would also depend on how much heavier a tank has to be to resist 350 vs 175 bar. The point remains, the tare weight of tanks will always be high and, the limitation on possible shape makes them hard to package. Expect cars to get even bigger and heavier if steel tanks for hydrogen are to be used. Or swallow the (extortionate) cost of carbon fibre tanks.
Or, better still, stick with what we know - ICE and agriculture and use the hydrogen for creating synthetic fuels. Engineers of the calibre of Adrian Newey and Pat Symonds advocate just that and I'm not seeing anyone with credentials better than theirs praising the current trajectory.

 

[ALFAitalia]

.......synthetic fuels are carbon neutral - which is the objective.

Really?.......well if you make it in a country that's 100% renewable power then possibly.....buy if you think of the qualities required and the MASSIVE amounts of power it takes to make its just not realistic until we have more renewable power than we know what to do with. Then of course you need to transport it in carbon neutral vehicles....to fuel stations, use electricity to pump it into cars...whereas electricity is easy to get from A to B. One of those things where theory is rather better than reality.....and its certainly not carbon neutral in use. Synthetic fuels share the same chemical properties as conventional petrol and diesel. This means they still release toxic gasses into the atmosphere when burned. While some synthetic products generate fewer particulates, gases like carbon dioxide (CO2), sulfur oxide (Sox) and nitrogen (NOx) are still released.

 

[Bellow]

Really?.......well if you make it in a country that's 100% renewable power then possibly....

Obviously that is the circumstance in which synthetic fuels are to be produced. So obvious, I didn't think it needed stating.

.buy if you think of the qualities required and the MASSIVE amounts of power it takes to make its just not realistic until we have more renewable power than we know what to do with.

A great deal of which is in the hydrogen production - which, at least, it can be made storable as a liquid fuel.

Then of course you need to transport it in carbon neutral vehicles....to fuel stations, use electricity to pump it into cars..

Yep, carbon neutral fuelled vehicles and a meagre amount of electricity to pump it. Unlike hydrogen that compressing it to have half a chance of storing it consumes one third of its energy value - wasteful.

.whereas electricity is easy to get from A to B.

Kinda overlooks the massive carbon footprint associated with installing the generating, distribution and storage infrastructure for electrification on the required scale.

One of those things where theory is rather better than reality.....and its certainly not carbon neutral in use.

How can you comment on a 'reality' that doesn't exist?

Synthetic fuels share the same chemical properties as conventional petrol and diesel. This means they still release toxic gasses into the atmosphere when burned. While some synthetic products generate fewer particulates, gases like carbon dioxide (CO2), sulfur oxide (Sox) and nitrogen (NOx) are still released.

Yes we know that. But with bio-fuels CO2 is absorbed in the growing, with synthetic fuels CO2 is removed from the atmosphere and when the hydrogen production is green, both fuel types are carbon neutral. And, as has been stated before, with the pressure off of minimising CO2 production (though it shouldn't be disregarded) engines that are zero/low NOx emitters is easily possible. Sulphur is a fossil fuel thing - not bio or synth. Particulates aren't a climate change concern but a health one and only then on account of what attaches to them (mainly due to the diesel combustion system).

The bigger risk is that the envisaged electrification falls short and the shortfall is made up with continued fossil fuel use. Bio-fuels and ICE are known technologies that only need be expanded. Synthetic fuel is the technology to master as it is the only viable method of energy storage - other than batteries which have enough drawbacks to make seeking alternatives prudent.
Further, bio and synthetic fuels can be utilised in countries where electrification will take decades longer than in the developed world. Without them, those countries will continue to pollute with fossil fuels.

 

[ALFAitalia]

Lol... hope it's nice weather on your planet. Synthetic fuels will never happen large scale... at least not in my lifetime. The making to movement efficency compared to running the car directly on the electricity to start with makes it a no go before you start.

 

[BTB 500]

Nope.
Bio and synthetic fuels are carbon neutral - which is the objective.

That's the case for bio and synthetic fuels right there.

Nope. It may change (who knows), but the current legislation refers specifically to 'zero emissions':

80% of new cars and 70% of new vans sold in Great Britain will now be zero emission by 2030, increasing to 100% by 2035

Pathway for zero emission vehicle transition by 2035 becomes law

80% of new cars and 70% of new vans sold in Great Britain will now be zero emission by 2030, increasing to 100% by 2035.

www.gov.uk

 

[Bellow]

Lol... hope it's nice weather on your planet. Synthetic fuels will never happen large scale... at least not in my lifetime.

Possibly, probably - bit the world doesn't end with your demise.

The making to movement efficency compared to running the car directly on the electricity to start with makes it a no go before you start.

You forget that once popular EVs were banished by ICE for one very good reason - convenience. Convenience - or rather the desire and often necessity - hasn't gone, it has increased. F me, people buy cheese pre-grated. And, F me, I'm having to say it again - the last word in efficiency does not matter when the fuels are carbon neutral.

 

[Bellow]

Nope. It may change (who knows), but the current legislation refers specifically to 'zero emissions':

Pathway for zero emission vehicle transition by 2035 becomes law

80% of new cars and 70% of new vans sold in Great Britain will now be zero emission by 2030, increasing to 100% by 2035.

www.gov.uk

I'm with Adrian Newey on this. Legislating engineers to a particular solution instead of giving them the objective and allowing them to define the solution is just plain wrong - and very likely to fail. If not fail, other opportunities will be lost.

FWIW, the only reason petrol engines can now get close to diesel fuel efficiency is by the adoption of lean burn technology. The same lean burn technology that was ousted when catalytic convertors were legislated into being some 30+ years ago. Had lean burn not had to been abandoned then, we could have had more fuel efficient petrol engines long before now. I'll leave the tax payer funded incentives to facilitate diesel uptake - the failures really are too depressing to recount.