California's Hydrogen Highway Adds Another Station

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

California's Hydrogen Highway Adds Another Station

Posted by timothy on Saturday December 13, 2014 @10:13AM from the chicken-meet-egg dept.

plover writes Scientific American notes that a new hydrogen refueling station has been added in Sacramento, bringing the state's total to ten. This was timed to coincide with Toyota's Japan release of their first commercially available fuel cell vehicle, the Mirai. Toyota is scheduled to start selling cars in Northern California next year.

87 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Ten! Stations by CrimsonAvenger · 2014-12-13 10:23 · Score: 2, Funny

Well, I know I'm ready to buy a hydrogen burner, knowing that there are ten refueling stations in the entire State....

--

"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
1. Re:Ten! Stations by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-13 10:49 · Score: 0
  
  Well, I know I'm ready to buy a hydrogen burner, knowing that there are ten refueling stations in the entire State....
  So fucking hilarious! Everything starts from first.
2. Re: Ten! Stations by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-13 16:07 · Score: 0
  
  So... I'm almost afraid to ask the question as your stupidity is actually painful to observe... But you do realise that at one time there were only 10 gas stations, right?
3. Re: Ten! Stations by FlyHelicopters · 2014-12-13 17:13 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, but when there were 10 gas stations, they were not competing with other fuel stations, other than perhaps horse feeding and care stations...
  And frankly, over time, the car replaced the horse, for many reasons...
  Changing fuel in a car doesn't change that it is still a car, there was a reason to put in gas stations, cars are improvements over horses. Another fuel type? Not so much...
4. Re:Ten! Stations by cellocgw · 2014-12-14 00:57 · Score: 1
  
  Well, if it really were "Ten!" stations that'd be 3 628 800 stations, which oughtta be about one for every household.
  
  --
  https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
5. Re:Ten! Stations by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-14 06:24 · Score: 0
  
  That's over 10 people per household...
6. Re:Ten! Stations by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-14 06:38 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  immigration does that...
I suppose this is a good thing... by Amigo+Van+Helical · 2014-12-13 10:26 · Score: 0

...but I have a hard time getting all that excited about hydrogen powered vehicles. Yes, their tailpipe emissions are much more benign than those of hydrocarbon eaters. But it's still a matter of going to the gas station to fill up, still immense corporate-controlled infrastructure. And you really don't want to spill any liquid H2 on your shoes.
1. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by savuporo · 2014-12-13 10:32 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Well to wheels, hydrogen is probably the most polluting fuel cycle imagined. At present like 95% of the hydrogen supply comes from fossil fuels, and end to end cycle efficiency is even lower than an average gas guzzling SUV.
  Rather than trying to push this into passenger cars, working on hydrogen based long haul trucks and airliners makes a lot more sense. But even then the theorethical "green" benefits are not clear cut.
  
  --
  http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slashdot.org Errors found while checking this document as HTML5!
2. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by plopez · 2014-12-13 10:59 · Score: 2
  
  I don't think t make sense in any way. The large carbon foot print and the fact it does nothing to wean us off of hydrocarbons makes t a bad idea. It makes more sense to burn natural gas. I cuts out middle man for lower costs and pollution. And a better developed infrastructure.
  
  --
  putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
3. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by mspohr · 2014-12-13 11:29 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Most hydrogen comes from natural gas (with lousy conversion efficiency. If you get your hydrogen from electricity, it has even worse efficiency. It uses about four times the electricity to make hydrogen and then convert it back to electricity in your "fool cell" vehicle as just putting the electricity in your vehicle and bypassing the whole hydrogen part.
  Plus, electricity is everywhere, literally everywhere. Anyone can just plug in at home and work, etc. With hydrogen, you have only ten places to refuel in California... not going very far.
  
  --
  I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
4. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-13 12:12 · Score: 0
  
  Since hydrogen must be made from hydrocarbons to be economical, why do car makers even bother with fuel cell cars?
5. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-13 12:52 · Score: 1
  
  Tax breaks, writeoffs, kickbacks, bribes, lobbying, etc.
6. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by rmdingler · 2014-12-13 12:53 · Score: 1
  
  Ironically, the I and T buttons on your keyboard are rather intermittently effective...
  
  --
  Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
  Ernest Hemingway
7. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by dgatwood · 2014-12-13 19:16 · Score: 1
  
  "Whee! We're releasing the CO2 somewhere else instead of from your tailpipe, so now our car is green!"
  What a load of crap.
  IMO, the only subsidies and tax breaks should be for true electric vehicles, because they are the only ones that can realistically be powered from non-CO2-emitting power sources. Everything else is just a workaround—a step in the wrong direction, purely in the name of expediency, solely because doing it right is expensive and challenging, and fuel cells are (relatively) cheap and easy.
  
  --
  Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
8. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by Noah+Haders · 2014-12-13 20:40 · Score: 1
  
  im surprised theres so much hate for H2. its true that most hydrogen today is from NG. but you realize that if you run your EV in many parts of the east coast you're basically running on coal? that's much worse.
  There are many H2 pathways that are from electrons, including green electron pathways. and there are other attractive ways of how hydrogen can be made from the grid without overwhelming it. you can make H2 when the grid load is low, using up renewable power that would otherwise not be used (eg wind power that is turned off because its not needed.
  also, aside from the $90k tesla, all EVs have horrible performance and range. they're like driving an electric golf cart that goes 17 holes. their only real use case is as a second commuter car in a household. All H2 vehicles are full purpose cars, like gasoline cars.
  In short, don't be hatin, slashdot. keep your mind open to new technology.
9. Re: I suppose this is a good thing... by xaxa · 2014-12-13 23:17 · Score: 1
  
  It probably makes some sense for vehicles that are only used in big cities, since it moves the pollution.
  London has had a few hydrogen buses for a few years now, but I don't think there are plans to develop them beyond a trial fleet.
  An electric bus (all batteries) Also exists, but isn't yet practical.
10. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by drinkypoo · 2014-12-14 00:25 · Score: 1
  
  im surprised theres so much hate for H2. its true that most hydrogen today is from NG. but you realize that if you run your EV in many parts of the east coast you're basically running on coal? that's much worse.
  Where do you think the energy for cracking the natgas into H2 comes from? Most of the energy for that is coming from coal! In short, H2 is made from coal and natgas. And we're fracking for the natgas. More natgas means more fracking, more H2 means more natgas, ENVIROFAIL.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
11. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by Trepidity · 2014-12-14 02:35 · Score: 1
  
  I think it's becoming increasingly clear that electric is a better choice. But Japan (both the government and industry) went pretty heavily into investing in fuel-cell tech some decades ago, when it was less clear which tech would win. And they don't seem willing to concede quite yet that electric cars now clearly are going to beat fuel-cell cars.
  
  --
  10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
12. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by jmcharry · 2014-12-14 02:54 · Score: 1
  
  Also take into account that the hydrogen is produced as one step of the process for making ammonia for fertilizer. One might argue that you are in effect burning fertilizer.
13. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by Noah+Haders · 2014-12-14 03:49 · Score: 1
  
  youre speaking from ignorance and youre boring me. evs will not work at scale. our aging infrastructure cant handle it. h2 can be made centrally and can be made during daily lulls when the renewables are idled due to low demand. h2 also avoids the issue of peak demand charges which can raise the price of electricity 100x.
14. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by Cyberax · 2014-12-14 04:10 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, most of energy to crack natural gas comes from (wait for it!)... natural gas! Enthalpy change in the 2*CH4 ---> C2H4 + 2*H2 is so small that it doesn't really matter, you lose more energy for pumping and heating the reactor.
15. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by drinkypoo · 2014-12-14 05:29 · Score: 1
  
  youre speaking from ignorance and youre boring me.
  Explain what I said was wrong.
  
  h2 can be made centrally and can be made during daily lulls when the renewables are idled due to low demand.
  Not cost-effectively. The efficiency of electrolytic production of hydrogen is shit.
  
  h2 also avoids the issue of peak demand charges which can raise the price of electricity 100x.
  It does what? It's horribly inefficient, it will increase our power requirements, so no, no it doesn't. If EVs aren't viable then H2 is even less so. It's also a false dichotomy because we can make biofuels, and the reasons we aren't are not technical there either. They're about greed and political will.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
16. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by Noah+Haders · 2014-12-14 06:11 · Score: 1
  
  research power to gas programs. when electricity demand is at a low, they actually take wind farms offline. this is missed green electrons. you use these green electrons to make H2 at electrolisys faciilities. then you can pump h2 into the ng pipeline for green ng, store it and run it through a PEM stack later for peak electricity needs, or use it for H2. it's cost effective with zero GHGs, which is why companies in germany, canada, and US are doing it right now.
  also research the "duck curve" and peak demand charges. with an EV, you use electricity when you plug in to charge, and when you draw a lot of power (for example with a fast charger) your electricity prices can shoot up 20x. h2 you make it when you want and store it, so you don't have these peak charges nor are you impacting the grid.
  while you're researching the duck curve, take a gander (ha!) at what drives electricity generation needs. it's not average load or total daily energy consumed. it's how much power is needed in the AM and PM peaks. you can make H2 during the lulls without impacting the grid or needing more generation capacity. EVs is not so, which is why when you scale out EVs to a large portion of the total vehicle fleet it becomes very scary.
  in short, look at your comments above, then look at my responses here, and you'll see where your ignorance lies.
17. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by drinkypoo · 2014-12-14 06:17 · Score: 1
  
  with an EV, you use electricity when you plug in to charge,
  
  No. You use electricity when you charge. Modern EVs permit you to decide when that happens. So you use the power at night, when the demand is low. And much of the point of "smart metering" is that you'll eventually be able to decide to charge when power is cheap. EVs which don't have enough range to be charged at night are a problem, sure. But it won't be long before we don't make those any more — substantially before there's sufficient hydrogen fueling infrastructure for anyone to consider buying a car which runs on hydrogen.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
18. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by Noah+Haders · 2014-12-14 06:30 · Score: 1
  
  and what about your dream of fast charger networks? those charge when you plug in, which is the point. you're going to drive to a fast charger then hang out for 5 hours then charge? no, you'll charge when you need it. get a clue.
19. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by drinkypoo · 2014-12-14 08:40 · Score: 1
  
  and what about your dream of fast charger networks?
  That dream is coupled to the dream of additional grid storage.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
20. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by AaronW · 2014-12-14 13:40 · Score: 1
  
  Tesla is addressing the "duck curve" by installing grid storage at their charging locations in order to even out the power draw. Even with hydrogen storage, producing hydrogen by cracking water is horribly inefficient and will require four power plants for every power plant needed to charge an EV.
  http://www.thenewatlantis.com/...
  Hydrogen just makes no sense.
  
  --
  This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
21. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by AaronW · 2014-12-14 13:42 · Score: 1
  
  I have time of use metering for my power and have a separate meter for charging my Tesla. Most EVs allow you to set what time charging begins and I have mine set at 11:05pm when the rates are the lowest. As for peak demand for rapid charging, Tesla is addressing this by adding grid storage at their charging sites to even out the load.
  
  --
  This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
22. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by dgatwood · 2014-12-14 13:54 · Score: 1
  
  im surprised theres so much hate for H2. its true that most hydrogen today is from NG. but you realize that if you run your EV in many parts of the east coast you're basically running on coal? that's much worse.
  Of course, I think most EVs are sold on the west coast, so that's probably a moot point. Besides, with EVs, you at least have the option of using clean energy (and even the ability to provide that energy yourself). With hydrogen, a truly green option doesn't even exist unless you use a grossly inefficient means of producing hydrogen, such as electrolysis of water, which is just horribly impractical.
  
  also, aside from the $90k tesla, all EVs have horrible performance and range.
  That's the fault of the shortsighted engineers who chose to put hitting a price point ahead of usability. It isn't inherent to EVs, just EVs made by people who either don't understand the market or are deliberately trying to kill that market out of fears over high reliability of EVs leading to fewer car sales in the long term—it's hard to say which.
  
  All H2 vehicles are full purpose cars, like gasoline cars.
  As long as you're within driving range of one of ten stations. By contrast, there are somewhere in the neighborhood of four thousand EV charging stations in California, and in a pinch, any electrical outlet can do the job, albeit more slowly. For that matter, a U-Haul trailer with a generator on it can probably keep you going indefinitely. :-D
  
  --
  Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
23. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by AaronW · 2014-12-14 14:03 · Score: 1
  
  Which is already happening. Tesla is in the process of installing grid storage at their superchargers.
  
  --
  This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
24. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by AaronW · 2014-12-14 14:05 · Score: 1
  
  According to this site converting from methane to hydrogen is around 70% efficient. You then lose another 20% of your efficiency compressing the hydrogen to 5000PSI. When you calculate the well to wheel efficiency you're better off with a hybrid car rather than a fuel cell car.
  
  --
  This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
25. Re: I suppose this is a good thing... by AaronW · 2014-12-14 14:07 · Score: 1
  
  If you're only used in big cities you're better off just going pure electric. The efficiency is much greater, the vehicle cost is lower and it's far more convenient to charge up at night than to have to wait in line at a hydrogen filling station.
  
  --
  This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
26. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by Noah+Haders · 2014-12-14 16:48 · Score: 1
  
  all these arguments are in circles. why would people on /. be against new technology? heck, people here root for space elevators. let's see what engineers can do and let the market decide.
27. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by Noah+Haders · 2014-12-14 17:49 · Score: 1
  
  it makes sense if youcan get a fully-functional fuel cell car vs. a hobbled limited-use battery car. show me one car outside of a $90k tesla that is not a hobbled 80 mile range putt putt car.
28. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by savuporo · 2014-12-14 20:16 · Score: 1
  
  Hydrogen lobby is anything but letting the market decide. Transportation is actually kind of tricky to leave to the market as transportation requires large infrastructure investments. Such as distributing gas, diesel, laying down train tracks, installing charging stations and so on.
  Governments will inevitably meddle, and meddle they will. Corn ethanol was/is a perfect example of government meddling gone wrong. Hydrogen is another disaster waiting in the winds.
  
  --
  http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slashdot.org Errors found while checking this document as HTML5!
29. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by AaronW · 2014-12-14 22:23 · Score: 1
  
  Show me a worthwhile fuel cell car? The pace of battery progress is quite high. The cost are dropping rapidly and the capacity is increasing while charging times are dropping. Right now any fuel cell car is very heavily subsidized. They will never sell given that the cost of hydrogen will always be significantly higher than gasoline while being less green to boot. Right now a decent hybrid will release less CO2 per mile than any hydrogen fuel cell car and there's not a lot of room for improvement. Making hydrogen from water is and always will be cost prohibitive due to the enormous amount of electricity required no matter the catalyst and fuel cell efficiency in a vehicle is maybe at best 60% efficient. Hell, it takes 20% of the energy contained in the hydrogen just to compress it to 5000PSI. In the best case making CO2 from methane is 70% efficient with the byproduct being CO2. The cost of hydrogen filling stations will always be quite high due to all of the safety aspects. You can't transport hydrogen over regular pipelines and you can't economically transport it by truck like gasoline. There's still also a lot of unknowns about fuel cells like how long the PEM membranes will actually last and how they'll hold up in various climates. For example, how well does a fuel cell stack survive a Montana winter, given that the byproduct is water and typically PEM membranes must maintain a certain humidity range. What happens when these cars leak, especially if they're in an enclosed space like a garage? Hydrogen is one of the most flammable substances known, requiring extremely little energy to ignite. It's explosive over an extremely high range of mixtures, higher than methane, and given that it will rise, in an enclosed space it will tend to accumulate at the ceiling.
  Then comes the problem of hydrogen filling stations. Nobody will want to invest in them because they are so costly to build unless they are very heavily subsidized. They're pushing cars with free hydrogen because they know that's the only way they'll sell. If people knew the true cost of hydrogen nobody in their right mind would buy a fuel cell car, The only way hydrogen can possibly be at all economically feasible (i.e. not 10x the cost of gasoline per mile) is to reform methane on site, and it still will be much more expensive than gasoline. HFC cars are a dead end. The safety issues alone will be costly. Hell, they've already had one hydrogen fire at the hydrogen filling station in my county for buses, and that isn't used by the general public. Fuel cells are still costly to build and still require platinum and there's a lot of additional complexity as well. Hydrogen has an extremely low energy density and the only way to store enough of it is to store it at very high pressure. Compressing hydrogen takes a lot of energy, roughly 20% of the energy contained in the hydrogen for 5000PSI. Tanks will need to be distributed all over the car since the volume of hydrogen needed to get any decent range will still be quite high, so the cost of those tanks will be quite high, especially if they're going to be safe in the event of a crash.
  Battery technology is rapidly dropping in cost, increasing capacity and decreasing charging time. EV charging stations are popping up everywhere. Walgreens, Whole Foods and Target are installing stations for their stores. Home charging is fairly easy and the time it takes at home generally doesn't matter since it's done overnight when there's a glut of electricity and prices are at their lowest. HFCs will never come anywhere close to the cost of an EV. The true cost of the Toyota fuel cell car is likely over double what they're asking and the car they're selling is mediocre at best. Rapid chargers are also being built out. Tesla is building out their network very rapidly and soon others will be following. Tesla's also using grid storage to even out the load to significantly reduce their peak demand. Once they get their gigafactory going and 35K 200 mile EVs are out fuel cell vehicles will be dead.
  I can charge my
  
  --
  This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
30. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by drinkypoo · 2014-12-15 00:32 · Score: 1
  
  Which is already happening. Tesla is in the process of installing grid storage at their superchargers.
  Yeah, note there was no complaint for that. It's hard to complain about people adding grid storage, which we desperately need anyway. The thing is, upgrading the grid and using more EVs means less trucks driving around delivering fuel, and even with our mostly-not-HVDC system we only lose about 5% in transmission in the USA and once the system is built it has few externalities, unlike OTR trucking which produces a lot of CO2 and does most of the road damage.
  I continue to [casually] promote rail-based solutions including freight rail and PRT, the latter of which is not an inherently rail-based solution but that's how I envision it because tires are always a compromise.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
31. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by Noah+Haders · 2014-12-15 04:29 · Score: 1
  
  Show me a worthwhile fuel cell car?
  Hyundai has a new FC car out that I can lease today. The Toyota Mirai is coming soon. show me a worthwhile EV car that's not a $90k space ship.
  
  They will never sell given that the cost of hydrogen will always be significantly higher than gasoline while being less green to boot
  costs are on track to drop below gasoline on a per-mile basis. There are many H2 pathways that are very green and these are being scaled up rapidly. Also remember that FC cars are much more efficient than gasoline cars, so any metric has to be on a per-mile basis.
  
  Making hydrogen from water is and always will be cost prohibitive due to the enormous amount of electricity required no matter the catalyst and fuel cell efficiency in a vehicle is maybe at best 60% efficient. Hell, it takes 20% of the energy contained in the hydrogen just to compress it to 5000PSI.
  depends where you are. in the PNW electricity prices are 3.5 cents / kwh. if you're smart you can play all sorts of load-balancing and green credit games to get prices down really low. As a benchmarks, it is 60 kwh to make a kg of H2, including compression.
  
  You can't transport hydrogen over regular pipelines and you can't economically transport it by truck like gasoline.
  There are plenty of H2 pipelines. also plenty of tube trailer trucks. The people who move H2 all around the country think it's viable cuz they do it.
  
  There's still also a lot of unknowns about fuel cells like how long the PEM membranes will actually last and how they'll hold up in various climates.
  20 fuel cell buses ran in Vancouver for 3 years. 5 fuel cell buses run in palm springs. it's much more viable than batteries. also, FC's have the power needed to do some heavy-duty HVAC, while it destroys the range of a battery vehicle to turn the AC on.
  
  Hell, they've already had one hydrogen fire at the hydrogen filling station in my county for buses, and that isn't used by the general public.
  the AC Transit leak should have been NBD. all they have to do is open a valve and let the H2 bleed out. it was a bfd because the fire department wasn't trained on what to do and they had a shizz fit and treated it like a big hazard. What everybody learned from this is to make sure your first responders are properly trained.
  
  Fuel cells are still costly to build and still require platinum and there's a lot of additional complexity as well.
  prices are down 8x and there's plenty of room to keep improving. it's an area of continuing fundamental research.
  
  HFCs will never come anywhere close to the cost of an EV. The true cost of the Toyota fuel cell car is likely over double what they're asking and the car they're selling is mediocre at best.
  it's clear you know nothing about the cost or the performance of the mirai, so you should refrain from making uneducated statements.
  
  Tesla is building out their network very rapidly and soon others will be following. Tesla's also using grid storage to even out the load to significantly reduce their peak demand.
  nobody cares what tesla does. they're a boutique company selling the fantasy of owning a spaceship car. live in the real world not your fantasy world.
  
  In a couple weeks Tesla will be starting their battery swapping. Once that goes in then the last advantage of hydrogen fuel cells is over.
  loooool battery swapping is doa and will never happen. battery companies are only fake pursuing it as a canard to have a bullet point argument against other fuels.
  
  Hydrogen filling stations will require that the hydrogen be made on-site since you can't effectively transport it.
  so? then make it on site. there are many technologies to do so.
32. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by Noah+Haders · 2014-12-15 04:52 · Score: 1
  
  I suppose the EV lobby is any better?
33. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by Noah+Haders · 2014-12-15 05:09 · Score: 1
  
  Then you more than double the mpg-equiv. you gotta look at per-mile metrics.
34. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by AaronW · 2014-12-15 10:53 · Score: 1
  
  Show me a worthwhile fuel cell car?
  Try driving any of those cars outside of the few hydrogen filling stations. Oh wait, you can't. By the end of next year only a few cities will be linked up by hydrogen filling stations. I can drive my Tesla from San Diego to Vancouver today, or across the country. By the end of next year most of the nation will be covered by rapid chargers where only a few major cities will be covered by hydrogen. I can also charge any place there's an outlet or at most RV parks if need be. Most of my charging happens at home. I spend 5 seconds at night to plug in and 5 seconds in the morning to unplug and have a full battery with over 200 miles of range, all in the comfort of my garage. I never have to set foot in a service station and only need to charge for long-distance travel. http://www.teslamotors.com/sup...
  Hyundai has a new FC car out that I can lease today. The Toyota Mirai is coming soon. show me a worthwhile EV car that's not a $90k space ship.
  Those cars are very heavily subsidized. They cost far more to build than what they're charging. For $57K the Mirai is a mediocre car. There's no way anyone would pay the true cost of the Mirai. They're also only selling 700 cars next year. Tesla sells far more cars than that every week with plans in 3 years to make 500K cars per year. There's also a reason why they subsidize the cost of the hydrogen because right now it's the equivalent of $5/gallon of gasoline.
  
  They will never sell given that the cost of hydrogen will always be significantly higher than gasoline while being less green to boot
  costs are on track to drop below gasoline on a per-mile basis. There are many H2 pathways that are very green and these are being scaled up rapidly. Also remember that FC cars are much more efficient than gasoline cars, so any metric has to be on a per-mile basis.
  Bullshit. The cost of hydrogen right now is very heavily subsidized. It can't be made cost competitive with gasoline. It is far too energy intensive to make it. You can't transport it to service stations like you can gasoline since the volume of hydrogen required is much larger and the tanks must be much smaller and heavier due to the extremely high pressures involved. Those narrow tanks have a wall thickness of about an inch so they're also quite heavy. It pretty much must be made on-site and that is expensive to do and energy intensive. Making hydrogen from methane is a very mature technology and there's not much room left to cut costs. It is far more expensive than gasoline.
  
  Making hydrogen from water is and always will be cost prohibitive due to the enormous amount of electricity required no matter the catalyst and fuel cell efficiency in a vehicle is maybe at best 60% efficient. Hell, it takes 20% of the energy contained in the hydrogen just to compress it to 5000PSI.
  depends where you are. in the PNW electricity prices are 3.5 cents / kwh. if you're smart you can play all sorts of load-balancing and green credit games to get prices down really low. As a benchmarks, it is 60 kwh to make a kg of H2, including compression.
  60KWh will get an electric car 200 miles or more. A HFC car will only go a fraction of that. Most places don't have electricity anywhere near that cheap. In my area the cost is closer to $.20-$.30/kwh. The best wholesale rate you might get is $0.10-$0.12/KWh, nowhere close to $0.035/KWh. Right now making hydrogen from water is the equivalent of $6-$11/gallon of gasoline assuming economies of scale which currently does not exist.
  
  You can't transport hydrogen over regular pipelines and you can't economically transport it by truck like gasoline.
  There are plenty of H2 pipelines. also plenty of tube trailer trucks. The people who move H2 all around the country think it's viable cuz they do it.
  Tube trailer trucks can't transport all that much hydr
  
  --
  This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
35. Re:I suppose this is a good thing... by Noah+Haders · 2014-12-15 11:41 · Score: 1
  
  today I can drive my FC car from Tijuana to Oregon. soon it will be no problem to go to BC. and I can do so significantly faster than your "fast charger". One thing that you're forgetting about FC technology is while you have a hard on for your space ship car other nations are investing significantly in H2 and see it as having a strong future. Japan is all in on H2. the countries that are the most aggressive about GHG emissions are choosing H2 as their pathway to sustainability. you should ask your self, why are they doing so? it turns out they did not call you to find out your opinion before moving ahead with their plans.
36. Re: I suppose this is a good thing... by xaxa · 2014-12-17 04:40 · Score: 1
  
  If you're only used in big cities you're better off just going pure electric. The efficiency is much greater, the vehicle cost is lower and it's far more convenient to charge up at night than to have to wait in line at a hydrogen filling station.
  The bus depot will have it's own diesel (or hydrogen) pump, so it's probably only a small saving. In a major city with a significant electric night bus service they'd probably need rapid charging points instead.
  London has six electric buses on various trials. I saw a video clip about them -- there were so many batteries they'd taken up the whole back of the bus, and obscured the read windscreen. That might not be the newest ones though.
  Trolley buses are a cheap solution, still used widely in the ex-Soviet Union, China, Pyongyang etc. The buses are light as well, so there's much less damage to the road surface. A small battery could add the flexibility to make minor route changes away from the wires.
10 whole stations! Woo woo! by Chas · 2014-12-13 10:34 · Score: 1, Funny

Oh boy! So, at this rate, someone would be able to drive coast to coast by...oh...3025?
Just in time for the 4th Succession War!

--

Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Toyota's mirai by kruach+aum · 2014-12-13 10:44 · Score: 5, Informative

Mirai means (far) future in japanese, as opposed to shourai, which means near future.
1. Re:Toyota's mirai by kruach+aum · 2014-12-13 11:21 · Score: 1, Flamebait
  
  Thanks for assuming I'm white you racist piece of shit.
2. Re:Toyota's mirai by rmdingler · 2014-12-13 11:25 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  It is assumed the Mercedes Hindenburg II LS will be a viable competitor.
  
  --
  Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
  Ernest Hemingway
3. Re:Toyota's mirai by Khyber · 2014-12-13 11:43 · Score: 1
  
  You're missing out on internet culture. Weeaboo applies to both white lovers of Japanese culture as much as it does to the Japanese, themselves.
  
  --
  Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
4. Re:Toyota's mirai by rmdingler · 2014-12-13 12:40 · Score: 1
  
  Wehr-aboo.
  
  --
  Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
  Ernest Hemingway
hmm by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-13 10:48 · Score: 0

Thats interesting
There's a similar road in Pennsylvania by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-13 11:16 · Score: 0

Only it's called the Hershey Highway.
In case anyone else is behind on this by phantomfive · 2014-12-13 11:20 · Score: 5, Informative

I wasn't aware that hydrogen fuel cell cars were already approaching production. Here are the stats for the Toyota Mirai:

Cost: $57,000 (before taxes and rebates)
0-60: 9 seconds
Range: 300 miles
It's a hybird, so it also has a battery pack (like the Prius)
You have to dump the resulting water

At the moment, most hydrogen is generated using fossil fuels (much like electricity), so it is only one of a two-part process if we wish to stop releasing CO2.

--
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
1. Re:In case anyone else is behind on this by wonkey_monkey · 2014-12-13 11:46 · Score: 2
  
  You have to dump the resulting water
  I assumed you meant that it was contaminated or something, and wasn't safe just to vent from the car, but it seems that...
  
  The Mirai has a button labeled H2O that opens a gate at the rear, dumping the water vapor that forms from the hydrogen-oxygen reaction in the fuel cell.
  Is this really not something they could automate?
  
  --
  systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
2. Re: In case anyone else is behind on this by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-13 12:01 · Score: 0
  
  How will you pretend that you're James Bond pushing the button to release an oil slick behind you while you're in traffic?
3. Re: In case anyone else is behind on this by rmdingler · 2014-12-13 12:50 · Score: 1
  
  In all likelihood, you're half right, but it would make for a more interesting poll question than we usually get.
  I suspect more /dotlings would fantasize about being a Bond supervillain than double oh himself.
  
  --
  Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
  Ernest Hemingway
4. Re:In case anyone else is behind on this by tlhIngan · 2014-12-13 20:53 · Score: 1
  
  I wasn't aware that hydrogen fuel cell cars were already approaching production. Here are the stats for the Toyota Mirai:
  [snip]
  You have to dump the resulting water
  At the moment, most hydrogen is generated using fossil fuels (much like electricity), so it is only one of a two-part process if we wish to stop releasing CO2.
  Hyundai is also piloting a project as well - though you lease the vehicle because they're only doing it in a few places where there are stations. I think the lease (which is fairly price at $600/month or so) includes fuel too.
  Though - why is there a water dump valve? I mean, since it comes out as steam, why not just have a tailpipe that emits steam? Or just let it drip on the ground like a car A/C.
  While getting hydrogen from hydrocarbons still emits CO2, it's sort of like electric vehicles - the carbon emitter is one place instead of many which is far easier to clean up. After all, next time you get stuck behind a truck or car belching smoke...
5. Re:In case anyone else is behind on this by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-14 01:44 · Score: 0
  
  Let me indulge in some complete and utter speculation.
  Perhaps it's not possible to continously vent without compromising the efficiency of the reaction. If so, perhaps when the water is vented the quantities that have built up are sufficient to present a hazard to other road users if the water is not dumped in a careful manner. Therefore it is left to the driver to find a suitable moment to release it. Maybe an improvement would be to periodically release the water into a tank, and then use an ultrasonic mister to release it continuously as mist and prevent the tank from overflowing.
6. Re:In case anyone else is behind on this by phantomfive · 2014-12-14 06:46 · Score: 1
  
  Though - why is there a water dump valve? I mean, since it comes out as steam, why not just have a tailpipe that emits steam? Or just let it drip on the ground like a car A/C.
  I really wonder that too.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Only 118,746 ... by jamesl · 2014-12-13 11:32 · Score: 2

... to go.
The USA had 118,756 filling stations (gas stations) in 2007 according to the Census
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...
Not quite ready for prime time.
Drivers will likely have to take a slight detour to reach the station, which is in an industrial section of West Sacramento, next to a cement factory that is currently being demolished.
The station was originally planned at a Shell station 2.5 miles away in a much busier section of town, but building codes required setbacks too wide to fit the hydrogen infrastructure within the station.
1. Re: Only 118,746 ... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-13 12:31 · Score: 0
  
  Contrary to what many think, when the automobile was invented, they didn't syart selling it immediately. They waited with the launch until a big pack of smart men had built thousands of gas stations all over the Ãlace. At first, people didn't know what those strange places were, but within decades everyone started to understand.
2. Re: Only 118,746 ... by Irate+Engineer · 2014-12-13 13:07 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  There was actually very good infrastructure in place for liquid fuel engines since kerosene (for lanterns and such) was widely available and sold in metered amounts from pumps in the late 1800s. It was not nearly the stretch to extend that network for gasoline dispensing as it would be to build a completely new infrastructure for hydrogen fuel.
  
  Hydrogen, from generation to storage to use, is a bad, inconvenient, and very expensive idea.
  
  --
  Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!
  Vote for Bernie in 2016!
3. Re: Only 118,746 ... by WindBourne · 2014-12-13 20:52 · Score: 2
  
  in fact, the cars from before about 1950's burned gasoline, ethanol, diesel, or ..... kerosene. As such, they worked with the fueling stations that existed for heaters and lanterns.
  
  And yet, most car makers and oil companies want to push H2
  while Musk continues to push plain old electricity.
  I wonder who is likely to win considering that in another 3 years, the Tesla model 3 will costs around 35K and they will be making 250K cars / year? That will put them in ~ top 25 car makers.
  
  --
  I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
4. Re: Only 118,746 ... by drinkypoo · 2014-12-14 00:20 · Score: 1
  
  You can probably mix kerosene down with motor oil and burn it in an IDI diesel. You can certainly mix motor oil up with gasoline and then burn that. You can also burn E95, yeah that's right, 95% alcohol and 5% gasoline. It takes high compression and a turbo, but it can be done. Again, it should run in the old IDIs.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
5. Re: Only 118,746 ... by AaronW · 2014-12-14 14:22 · Score: 1
  
  Hydrogen will lose big time. There is just no way to make hydrogen cost competitive with gasoline. If you're producing hydrogen from methane you're hydrogen powered car will release more CO2 per mile than a good hybrid. Hydrogen production and filling stations are not cheap and will always be far more costly than a gasoline station, especially with all of the safety requirements. As it is, the local hydrogen filling station in my county used for filling buses already has had one hydrogen fire.
  Cracking water to produce hydrogen makes even less sense. Even with the best catylist it is still very inefficient.
  Hell, you use 20% of the energy capacity of hydrogen just compressing it. Automotive fuel cells themselves are typically only 60% efficent.
  EVs are far simpler. Battery technology is steadily improving while the cost is steadily decreasing with no end in sight for capacity, charging and longevity improvements.
  Plus you can charge your EV at home, work or while shopping. Electricty is everywhere and building charging stations is quite inexpensive. Charging stations are also popping up everywhere. Retailers like Walgreens and Target are in the process of installing them at all of their stores. Rapid charging stations, while considerably more expensive to build, are still a fraction the cost of a hydrogen fueling station and require far less maintenance and have far fewer safety issues to worry about. Plus with an EV, if you charge at home you never have to spend time waiting at the gas pump and it is far cheaper, even in my location where we have about the highest prices of electricity in the country (PG&E). Hydrogen will never be able to compete with this. The charging times for EVs will continue to decrease and with grid storage at the charging locations they'll be able to smooth out the load (Tesla is already doing this).
  The only thing Hydrogen offers is the same paradime of having to drive to a filling station and filling up quickly but this advantage is shrinking rapidly.
  In a few weeks Tesla will be opening their first battery swapping station. Now you can go from empty to full in 90 seconds if you want, far faster than the fastest gas or hydrogen filling station, without ever having to step out of the car, insert a nozzle, etc. Eventually the other car manufacturers will catch up with EVs.
  
  --
  This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
6. Re: Only 118,746 ... by WindBourne · 2014-12-14 16:04 · Score: 1
  
  While what you wrote is 100% accurate (as pertains to the efficiency), economics and regulations play major parts in deciding winners.
  H2 is a disaster. BUT, if oil companies, along with all of the top 10 major car companies push it, it is POSSIBLE for them to win.
  Now, with that said, I think that when Tesla releases Gen 3, I believe that it is all over. I think that the majority of buyers will INSIST on cars to be built like a tesla. And sales will slide for the top 10 companies.
  
  --
  I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
7. Re: Only 118,746 ... by AaronW · 2014-12-15 10:57 · Score: 1
  
  It's not just Tesla with their gen 3. Nissan and Audi are also planning 200+ mile EVs and Nissan is looking at keeping the costs down as well. GM, Ford and BMW aren't sitting still either. It's just a matter of the battery prices to continue their downward trend in cost and upward trends in capacity and performance. The writing is on the wall for fuel cell vehicles and has been for a while. Tesla's gigafactory alone should drop their battery prices by at least 30%.
  
  --
  This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
8. Re: Only 118,746 ... by WindBourne · 2014-12-16 00:00 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, Audi, GM, Ford, BMW, etc are all going to push FC cars. They are doing the EVs currently because California as well as Tesla forces the issue. But, other than nissan, all of the major car companies have said that the battery is dead and that FC are the way to the future.
  
  That is why Gen 3 is so very important. When it comes out at say 35K and the owners have access to the Super Chargers AND Tesla is building out the new battery exchange mechanism, well, at that point, I think that the FCs makers will look foolish since relatively few cars will be sold while Tesla (and hopefully nissan) will be backed up.
  
  BTW, I have issues with Nissan. The leaf is a POS. In fact, IMHO, all of the EVs are poorly designed except for Tesla. The leaf does not deal with heating/cooling of the batteries. The range SUX.
  
  --
  I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Die Hydrogen by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-13 12:26 · Score: 1

Unless they are making EVs with hydrogen range extenders to be able to drive between cities, it makes no sense.
They are spending way too much money on Hydrogen, and the fuel is expensive compared to electricity. They could have built a lot more DC fast chargers and level 2 chargers around the state and nation for the price they are spending to roll out hydrogen to a very few number of drivers.
Now, if gasoline was running out in 50 years like we thought it was going to be before tar sands and fracking, along with the mess in the OPEC countries. Hydrogen would have played a part. Now it doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense. Electric vehicles are getting much better, and they have a lot more benefits, including not giving money to oil cartels, trust fund kids, rednecks, polluters, bought-off politicians, and religious extremists.
Re:10 whole stations! Woo woo! by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-13 12:36 · Score: 0

Just in time for the 4th Succession War!
Haven't we had quite a few more than that already?
Re:10 whole stations! Woo woo! by Chas · 2014-12-13 13:25 · Score: 1

Just in time for the 4th Succession War!
Haven't we had quite a few more than that already?
In a word? Nope.

--

Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Spent 100 million on what? by Whatsmynickname · 2014-12-13 13:43 · Score: 3, Interesting

Hydrogen stations in California have had a choppy rollout. Former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) first created the "hydrogen highway" concept in 2004 by executive order and budgeted $15 million for hydrogen demonstration projects, stations and buses through 2008. Schwarzenegger increased spending in 2007, signing A.B. 118, which provided roughly $90 million for hydrogen through this year. A bill that Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed last year, A.B. 8, reformed the funding process, allocating $20 million per year through 2023 or until 100 stations are built.
So CA has spent $100 million so far, and all we have are 10 stations? Where did all the money go?
1. Re:Spent 100 million on what? by Trepidity · 2014-12-14 02:43 · Score: 1
  
  Most of the first $15m went towards R&D and custom manufacturing costs for some tech demos, like a hydrogen-powered bus. That's about what I'd expect that to cost, given fully-loaded engineering salaries (~$200-300k/yr after overhead) and how expensive it is to build one-off things. Might not have been worth building in the first place, though.
  
  --
  10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Hurray for competing standards of nonsense! by DaHat · 2014-12-13 14:42 · Score: 2

On the one side we have the entrenched and largely ubiquitous gasoline infrastructure trying to keep electricity from becoming the dominant (good luck)... the recent upstart of hydrogen which requires you to rather carefully plan your commute... and LNG sitting there in the corner saying "Don't forget about me guys!"
It's like Verizon vs ATT on pay-per-view side and Sprint in it's own ring waiting for T-Mobile to arrive on PBS.
It's pretty easy to guess which is going to get the bigger numbers in terms of revenue.

--
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
1. Re:Hurray for competing standards of nonsense! by phantomfive · 2014-12-13 15:20 · Score: 1
  
  and LNG sitting there in the corner saying "Don't forget about me guys!"
  There are already a hundred thousand LNG vehicles in the US alone.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
2. Re:Hurray for competing standards of nonsense! by FlyHelicopters · 2014-12-13 18:55 · Score: 1
  
  There are already a hundred thousand LNG vehicles in the US alone.
  Yes, over many years... and there are over 250,000 plug in electric cars in the US already, just since 2008...
  LNG is simply not going to happen, for many reasons... it probably should have, 20 years ago, but it just didn't...
3. Re:Hurray for competing standards of nonsense! by Trepidity · 2014-12-14 02:45 · Score: 1
  
  I agree for private cars. The situation with buses is less clear. If you have overhead wires, of course you can run an electric bus on the grid, but most cities don't want to put that in (possible exceptions for BRT lines, but even those seem to usually not be electrified). And with current battery tech, a battery-powered electric bus is challenging. So I think the current trend of LNG buses being slowly rolled out has at least some life in it.
  
  --
  10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Re:10 whole stations! Woo woo! by FatdogHaiku · 2014-12-13 15:15 · Score: 1

Just in time for the 4th Succession War!
Nothing succeeds like excess!

--
You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
Justice by JimSadler · 2014-12-13 22:23 · Score: 1

Perhaps laws should be put into effect that require gasoline and diesel engines in cars to have the same level of emissions as electric or hydrogen powered cars.
1. Re:Justice by drinkypoo · 2014-12-14 00:23 · Score: 1
  
  Perhaps laws should be put into effect that require gasoline and diesel engines in cars to have the same level of emissions as electric or hydrogen powered cars.
  First, EVs and hydrogen cars would have to be viable. Modern gas-powered cars have pretty great emissions, anyway. The primary problem remains the sequestered-carbon fuels and feedstocks. EVs run on these, too, indirectly. If we upgraded the national grid substantially (it would cost a minuscule fraction of our military budget, and pay military dividends itself) then using renewables to charge up these EVs would be a viable solution.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
2. Re:Justice by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-14 05:14 · Score: 0
  
  You still produce 19 lbs of CO2 for every gallon of gas that is burned. Let alone the amount of energy needed to produce that gallon of gas.
  Now, how far can an EV go on the same emissions for a coal powered generating plant? How about the solar panels on my roof? What about the smog pollutants like NO2 and SO2?
3. Re:Justice by drinkypoo · 2014-12-14 05:30 · Score: 1
  
  Now, how far can an EV go on the same emissions for a coal powered generating plant?
  Good question. Make sure you account for the fissile materials which come out of the smokestack, which are not accounted for at all in these comparisons.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Cars are for lease only, not for sale by Anonymous Coward · 2014-12-14 05:08 · Score: 0

Is Toyota now selling the cars instead of leasing?
What if? by kheldan · 2014-12-14 06:05 · Score: 1

What if all vehicles were hydrogen fuel cell electric? Yes, carbon emissions would drop to nothing (for vehicles), but what about global oxygen levels? Fuel cells bind up the hydrogen with oxygen from the atmosphere to make water vapor. Has anyone run the numbers on how this would affect oxygen levels?

--
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
1. Re:What if? by vandamme · 2014-12-14 14:39 · Score: 1
  
  In order for H2 cars to be truly green, you have to take water and split it and vent the oxygen. So you get the water back when you run your fuel cell car, and all is right again with the world.
  Now all we need is a way of turning sunbeams into electricity, and we're all set. Of course, you could just charge up batteries instead, much more efficiently.
  You can't burn coal to make the electricity without blowing your green cred. Using oil, natural gas, etc. to make hydrogen, is even worse because they're fossil fuels and also increase CO2. .