Because then Mark can't claim that he has zero-emissions vehicles, so he wants to convert to H2 (and lose a significant part of the energy) and that inefficient H2 will then qualify for the highest subsidies by California as "zero emissions". All the while *increasing* the CO2 emissions, compared to using the natural gas directly in the vehicle (which would not fit the arbitrary requirement of "zero emissions" but which would bring the total system emissions down significantly - without excessive costs for a H2 infrastructure...
*that* is what I hinted at earlier and that Mark does not want to hear... He even continues to claim that his solution is better, like a good lobbyist but without even hinting at *how* that solution is better. The only thing I have seen till now is the claim "zero emissions". If you read the previous few sentences again, you'll understand what a canard that claim is in this respect. BTW, In most European countries it is normal to find Natural gas (called LPG) at most gas stations, as around 10% of all vehicles run on that fuel, mostly the highest-mileage vehicles as the fuel is very cheap but the installation in the car is taxed the highest (yearly tax) so you only come out ahead if you drive enough (say, more than 30,000 a year) while between 10-30k mi per year you would usually be better off with Diesel as fuel and below 10k mi per year the low vehicle tax and high fuel tax on regular gas (petrol) will make that the best option. This is for passenger vehicles - semi trucks always use Diesel. Since natural gas is not always available in all regions and countries, and because it is easy - often required - to run occasionally on regular gas to protect the engine, the installation is always "dual-tank": a gas cylinder plus a liquid "petrol" tank. The gas cylinder typically holds LPG enough for about 200 miles range, sometimes less. That is another reason to have an additional petrol tank. If the gas cylinder holds 30 liters of liquefied gas and the price is around 0.50 Euros per liter, then this is indeed $20 for a fill up, but understand that this is maybe half or one third the price per mile of regular petrol. 100 Euro gives you approx a full 60-liter (15 gal) tank of petrol, since the avg price is around 1.70 Euro/l which is almost $9 per gal. I am afraid that if we remove the various subsidies from H2 and look at its cost (which has not been published by anyone that I am aware of) then the European fuel prices will seem cheap compared to H2. Especially if you know that there is also compressed gas available in USA - there are a few isolated dedicated filling stations, usually near airports, and there is the home filling station using a compressor and your good old natural gas pipeline (not available in all homes, but present in the majority). Cor van de Water Chief Scientist Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com Email: cwa...@proxim.com Private: http://www.cvandewater.info Skype: cor_van_de_water Tel: +1 408 383 7626 -----Original Message----- From: EV [mailto:ev-boun...@lists.evdl.org] On Behalf Of Marion Hakanson via EV Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 10:53 PM To: ev@lists.evdl.org Subject: Re: [EVDL] Tesla might Supercharge EVs to regain 400mi in 15min for7 credits I have a cousin who lives in Italy. They own a small Fiat van which runs on both methane (compressed) and regular gasoline; Apparently it costs the equivalent of $20 to fill the methane tank, and about $100 to fill the gas tank (which they'll do if they're in the hinterlands and can't find a methane station). If most H2 comes from methane (natural gas), why not just burn the methane directly, instead of converting it multiple times (and losing something at every step), so you can feed it to a fuel cell? Regards, Marion On 07/28/14 10:30 PM, Mike Nickerson via EV wrote: > https://greet.es.anl.gov/ > > I have looked at it in the past. One thing to look at when someone reports results of the model: > > Everything is configurable in the model. Make sure the assumptions about generation and usage are well understood (either left to defaults or well documented). It is very easy to sway the outcome with changes in assumptions. > > In many cases, the changes can be realistic, but they need to be vetted. For example, running the model for Idaho, the electrical grid is more than 50% renewable and less than 30% coal. Those assumptions for New York would be very wrong. I believe the defaults are national averages. > > Mike > > > On July 28, 2014 7:33:57 PM MDT, Cor van de Water via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org> wrote: >> All data I have seen till now shows that emissions go up with the >> indroduction of H2, due to the low efficiency well-to-wheels of >> creating >> H2. >> So, it is considered not just a very difficult energy carrier, but also >> inefficient, besides being very costly in roll out. >> If you have data to the contrary, I am interested in vetting it (since >> it is easy to mislead with cherry-picked info). My mind is open, I tend >> to decide >> based on data. Fan-boy? Not so much. >> Got a link for that GREET model? >> >> Cor van de Water >> Chief Scientist >> Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com >> Email: cwa...@proxim.com Private: http://www.cvandewater.info >> Skype: cor_van_de_water Tel: +1 408 383 7626 >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mark Abramowitz [mailto:ma...@enviropolicy.com] >> Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 6:27 PM >> To: Cor van de Water; Electric Vehicle Discussion List >> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Tesla might Supercharge EVs to regain 400mi in >> 15min >> for7 credits >> >> You are horribly mistaken if you believe that FCEVs increase current >> emissions of either criteria or GHGs. Again, check the results from the >> GREET model. >> >> Every responsible agency that I work with locally believe that you >> CANNOT meet public health standards or GHG goals without both BEVs and >> FCEVs. >> >> We need a 60%+ decrease in NOx emissions to meet current standards, >> which data indicates are inadequate, and we expect will be tightened >> further. >> >> In a short time, most purchased autos will need to be ZEVs. That means >> that people like Peri, who has identified range issues as necessitating >> his own ICE in addition to a BEV, will need to forget the ICE. For >> some, >> that will mean BEVs, for some FCEVs, for some hybrids, and (IMO), >> combinations of those as technology progresses. >> >> We need ZEVs of all flavors. >> >> Sorry for your pain, but it's all self-induced as well as hindering >> efforts of those that know what they're doing. The fanboy stuff isn't >> productive for those of us doing real work. >> >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On Jul 28, 2014, at 5:30 PM, Cor van de Water via EV >> <ev@lists.evdl.org> wrote: >>> >>> Mark, >>> If I am mistaken and you do have an interest in the environment, >>> then your words and your actions are in conflict. >>> The fact that you are not just promoting Hydrogen but even lobby to >>> get legislation that makes it a requirement and the environment be >>> damned by the associated increase in CO2 output, makes this all the >>> more painful. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Cor van de Water >>> Chief Scientist >>> Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com >>> Email: cwa...@proxim.com Private: http://www.cvandewater.info >>> Skype: cor_van_de_water Tel: +1 408 383 7626 >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Mark Abramowitz [mailto:ma...@enviropolicy.com] >>> Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 8:23 AM >>> To: Cor van de Water; Electric Vehicle Discussion List >>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Tesla might Supercharge EVs to regain 400mi in >> 15min >>> for7 credits >>> >>> Thank you for falsely stating stating my interest and what I care >> about. >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>>>> On Jul 28, 2014, at 12:05 AM, Cor van de Water via EV >>>> <ev@lists.evdl.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> Bill, >>>> >>>> Mark has no interest whether it is simpler to use Hydrogen or not. >>>> He even does not care that the use of Hydrogen will increase the >>> amount >>>> of CO2 being burned (so, it is a disaster for the environment). >>>> He is promoting Hydrogen - that is all. Look up his profile and you >>> will >>>> understand. >>>> >>>> I urge all members of this forum to once again adhere to the earlier >>>> decision to avoid Hydrogen as a topic, because it is.... explosive. >>>> >>>> Cor van de Water >>>> Chief Scientist >>>> Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com >>>> Email: cwa...@proxim.com Private: http://www.cvandewater.info >>>> Skype: cor_van_de_water Tel: +1 408 383 7626 >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: EV [mailto:ev-boun...@lists.evdl.org] On Behalf Of Bill >> Woodcock >>>> via EV >>>> Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2014 10:58 AM >>>> To: Mark Abramowitz >>>> Cc: Electric Vehicle Discussion List >>>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Tesla might Supercharge EVs to regain 400mi in >>> 15min >>>> for7 credits >>>> >>>> >>>> On Jul 27, 2014, at 10:39 AM, Mark Abramowitz >> <ma...@enviropolicy.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I've seen an animation of such a device for natural gas dispensing, >>>> and am told it could just as easily be done for hydrogen. >>>> >>>> How does that address what I said? I've seen animations of the >>>> Incredible Hulk, that doesn't support the proposition that it could >>>> "just as easily be done for X." >>>> >>>>> But we know that whatever is being talked about... trip to the >> moon, >>>> world peace, cold fusion... you will be certain that it is "simpler, >>>> cheaper, and easier than hydrogen." >>>> >>>> So, prove me wrong. What is it about hydrogen that you think is >>> easier >>>> to move than electrons? >>>> >>>> -Bill >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -------------- next part -------------- >>>> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... >>>> Name: signature.asc >>>> Type: application/pgp-signature >>>> Size: 841 bytes >>>> Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail >>>> URL: >>> >> <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20140727/a966 >>>> 07fb/attachment.pgp> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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) >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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) > > _______________________________________________ > 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) _______________________________________________ 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)
