> On Jun 26, 2014, at 4:04 PM, "EVDL Administrator" <evp...@drmm.net> wrote: > >> On 26 Jun 2014 at 13:00, Mark Abramowitz via EV wrote: >> >> Your premise is wrong. The big energy companies do *not* like FCVs. > > I suspect that they'd much prefer them to BEVs. > >>> Remember, hydrogen is not really a fuel. You can't pump it out of the >>> ground. You have to make it from some other fuel. >> >> Not necessarily, unless you wish to call water a fuel. > > Now cut that out. You know fulll well that water is not a fuel any more > than hydrogen is.
Right. You said that you have to make Hydrogen out of a fuel. > The fuel is the energy input to the electrolysis, or the > natural gas input to the steam reforming. > > The hydrogen is just an energy carrier, and not a very efficient one at > that. Yes, an energy carrier. I won't argue efficiency with you. > > Dream on. I don't know why you're so keen on hydrogen (maybe you'd like to > tell us about your involvement with it?), but it's a loser. > I've always been keen on electric drive vehicles. Whether you're talking BEVs or FCEVs, I don't care. My first involvement (and the first ZEV mandate work) came before H2 was even discussed, so it was all BEVs. H2 came later. They both have pros and cons. Personally, my view is that hybridization of the two will likely be where we end up, with the dominant element changing with technology. My first involvement? Probably just prior to that private citizen lawsuit I mentioned in an earlier post, responding to "can't, can't, can't" . I was that private person, who also happened to be air quality director for an environmental group. And in still do this for a living, supporting ZEVs of all types as a consultant, as part of a trade association, on boards, etc. all towards cleaning the air. I've been doing this in one form or another for over 30 years. Better hope that H2 is not a loser, because then we are all losers. >> >>> Most often that's >>> natural gas (and IIRC the process produces more CO2 than getting an >>> equivalent amount of energy by directly burning the gas). >> >> The process produces less than the petroleum we're trying to replace it >> with. > > Citation needed. > >> And the tailpipe emissions (the main driver for the regs) are zero. > > If the anti-BEV crowd can flog the old canard that BEVs just transfer > emissions to powerplant stacks, then they should also note that FCVs > transfer emissions to the hydrogen production plants. Do they? > > David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA > EVDL Administrator > > = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = > EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/ > = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = > Note: mail sent to "evpost" and "etpost" addresses will not > reach me. To send a private message, please obtain my > email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ . > = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = > > > _______________________________________________ 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)
