Hello Mark,
My contention was not to w(h)ine but to point out the technical
deficiencies that needed to be addressed. Have they been addressed???
In reading the latest ad from Toyota on their 2015 FCV, the tanks will
store hydrogen at 70 mega-pascals which converts to slightly over 10,000
pounds (5 tons) per square inch. To me, this is a potential safety
issue especially if a country's fleet was replaced with these tanks. In
the USA, that would be 400+ million tanks produced and not a one with a
defect?
The stated ad range is 700 km based on the JC08 Cycle.
http://www.toyota-global.com/innovation/environmental_technology/fuelcell_vehicle/
This is what green.autoblog had to say about the JC08 Cycle
(http://green.autoblog.com/2009/12/15/what-does-the-prius-phev-mileage-really-mean-on-the-jc08-cycle/):
"On the JC08 test, the Prius is rated at a "mere" 76.7 mpg (U.S.).
The EPA ranks the same car at just 50 mpg combined, a number in line
with what most regular drivers will achieve. "
Prorating the 700 km based on the blog's statement, 700 km converts to
about 285 miles (700*50/76.7/1.6).
www.worldcarfans.com said: "Toyota previously stated the 2015 FCV (name
not final) will be able to perform the 0-62 mph (0-100 km/h) in a rather
decent 10 seconds and will offer a maximum range of around 300 miles
(482 km). Once the fuel is depleted, a complete fill will take only
around three minutes which isn't half bad."
I my opinion, Toyota is being deceptive by inflating the FCV range.
At the bottom of the Toyota FCV ad, there is a picture of the secondary
battery. It looks exactly like the Prius NiMH battery pack. I assume
that the battery is there to provide boost for the 0 to 62 - 10 second
acceleration time.
While the ad says "Sales", implying cash for a title, there were earlier
articles mentioning only leases will be offered. Leases would mean that
the Toyota FCV is not ready for prime time and I suspect that this is
the case.
I assume that Toyota has made advances that are not obvious but the
numbers are not showing anything dramatic.
On 6/25/2014 8:16 PM, Mark Abramowitz wrote:
Sorry, finger slipped before I was done.
**************
Sounds like a very old analysis.
Toyota will be selling their cars in California, which should be your
first clue. BEV have had (and still do) their own challenges, too. But
it's just not productive to focus on those as have all the "negative
Nellies" for decades. I've heard over 30 years of "can't, can't, can't"
about electric drive vehicles of all types.
In the 80's, the agencies were saying that, too. They also said "can't,
can't, can't" about cleaning up the air any further. So they got sued in
federal court by a private citizen, who, to make a long story short, won.
The air was supposed to get better until the early 90's, and then get
worse due to growth. Check out the timing of clean air progress since
the 80's, and also look at when the ZEV mandate was originally adopted.
So, do you want some cheese to go with your w(h)ine?
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 25, 2014, at 3:48 PM, Peter Eckhoff via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org>
wrote:
AC Propulsion had a Power Point slide where they compared the efficiency
of various "fuels". Their standard was an EV with the equivalent of 50
MPG. A similar vehicle, powered by hydrogen produced from reformatted
natural gas and fed into a fuel cell, was the equivalent of 30 mpg while
hydrogen produced by electrolysis was the equivalent of 12 mpg.
There a number of technical problems with fuel cells:
1) A fuel cell life expectancy was about 2,000 hours. Since my average
driving speed is 30 mpg, I would have to replace my fuel cell every 60K
miles. Therefore, a different fuel cell construction technique would
have to be used.
2) A pack of battery or electrolytic capacitors or an ICE was needed to
aid in acceleration. Therefore, a faster way of transferring the
"proton" through the electrolyte is needed. Think of a proton as a
person needed to run through air as opposed through water or molasses.
3) The storage of hydrogen to go 300 miles in a Toyota Camry needed 3
specially carbon wound tanks where the internal pressures reached 700
bar. A bar is 14.7 pounds per square inch. This equates to 5 tons per
square inch in a "2 ton" vehicle. Catastrophic failures would be
catastrophic. The hydrogen, therefore, needs to be stored in a
molecular sponge where the hydrogen freely flows in and out of storage
without much energy inducements. One real scheme required 800 degree
Fahrenheit temperatures to release the hydrogen from storage.
Given the number of technical problems that need to be solved, I don't
see hydrogen fuel celled vehicles coming into common use anytime soon.
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
