06-17-2021, 11:10 AM | #67 | |
Ground Clearance?
231
Rep 1,649
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
E90 330i - E90 335i - E92 335i |
|
Appreciate
1
MadBimmeRad7107.00 |
06-17-2021, 11:10 AM | #68 |
Captain
491
Rep 744
Posts |
Hydrogen Fuel technology has some very promising advantages over oil and electric. It also has some distinct disadvantages, lack of infrastructure, difuculty to produce including the energy needed to produce it, storage and transportation just to name a few.
Hydrogen fuel cells may be a wonderfully environmental solution but currently the vast majority of hydrogen production is far from being carbon neutral. Hydrogen can be produced using diverse, domestic resources—including fossil fuels, such as natural gas and coal (with carbon sequestration-current main source); nuclear energy; and other renewable energy sources, such as biomass, wind, solar, geothermal, and hydro-electric power—using a wide range of processes. The overall challenge to hydrogen production is cost. For cost-competitive transportation, a key driver for energy independence, hydrogen must be comparable to conventional fuels and technologies on a per-mile basis. In order for fuel cell electric vehicles to be competitive, the total untaxed, delivered and dispensed, cost of hydrogen needs to be less than $4/gge. A gge, or gasoline gallon equivalent, is the amount of fuel that has the same amount of energy as a gallon of gasoline. One kilogram of hydrogen is equivalent to one gallon of gasoline. This goal is based on thorough research with stakeholders, academia, and national labs. |
Appreciate
1
GrussGott18113.00 |
06-17-2021, 11:17 AM | #69 | |
Ground Clearance?
231
Rep 1,649
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
E90 330i - E90 335i - E92 335i |
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-17-2021, 01:27 PM | #70 | |
Captain
511
Rep 802
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-17-2021, 02:27 PM | #71 | |
Banned
429
Rep 756
Posts |
Quote:
I can't wait! |
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-17-2021, 02:51 PM | #72 |
Private First Class
48
Rep 103
Posts |
My hope is that they release this as a plug-in hydrogen hybrid EV with 50+ miles range a full battery charge. The capacity of the 45e is pretty much right for me.
Daily driving based on overnight charging at home. Only on long journeys would the fuel cell kick in. Less hydrogen usage, less pressure on an immature distribution infrastructure and probably cheaper running costs. Less lithium required in the vehicle so it's lighter and perhaps cheaper too. |
Appreciate
0
|
06-17-2021, 03:14 PM | #73 |
Major General
3127
Rep 6,728
Posts |
The way we make hydrogen currently is mostly not particularly green. There have been some incremental improvements in the production process using electrolysis by use of different electrodes where the source water doesn't have to be as pure and allows them to last longer, but yes, breaking hydrogen out of water takes a fair amount of energy.
Many of the green sources of energy are cyclical...like solar only working during the daytime, and wind, generally stronger during the day as well caused by the sun's differential heating. Tides OTOH are cyclical, but very reliable and predictable. In the last 5-years or so, there's been a lot of research on how to convert that to electricity whereby there are now some test tidal and wave generators making actual electrical power and based on those results, the probability of significantly more in the future. The power industry does have times when there is a significant overcapacity but generally, there's not an easy, economical way to store that energy for later use to balance the load out. Some places are moving towards huge battery storage. The hydro system at Niagara Falls uses excess energy to pump water to a reservoir to augment power during the day...hydrogen production has the potential to store energy when we have excess capacity when that capacity is green...it wouldn't make much sense to do it with fossil fuels. So, when hydrogen can be made from green sources, it's a good way to store energy that when converted back is also green. Water, if you include the oceans, is either a big problem with supply, like in desert areas, or a big problem near the oceans where storms or along rivers that flood. But, if you look at it like we don't actually MAKE any hydrogen, we're just converting it from one form to another (like water to hydrogen and oxygen and back again, or when burning a fossil fuel from carbohydrates to carbon dioxide, water, and nitrogen compounds), converting between hydrogen+oxygen and water and back is MUCH cleaner, if we can do it with green energy. Making a fuel cell more efficient and 'making' hydrogen efficiently and cleanly will all take further research to get where we want to go. Hydrogen can be burned, as well as used in a fuel cell, so if we had a method to produce it that was green, and economical, that would be quite useful. As to climate change, we may already have passed a tipping point. While humans don't have weather history for more than a blink in geologic time scales, we can infer the atmospheric concentrations of gasses fairly well for more than 600K years in ice cores, and longer than that in sedimentary rock. While there have been times in geological history where the CO2 levels were higher than they are now, primarily when volcanic activity was MUCH higher, the RATE of change in those levels has NEVER been anywhere near as steep which is what it putting so much stress on the environment and the species that are not getting enough time to adapt. The amount of open water in the Arctic, and the breakup of the ice sheets exposes the Arctic to become much more efficient at absorbing solar energy. Keep in mind that the Gulf stream is powered by the hot water near the equator and the cold water from the Arctic. We're heating up the equatorial waters more, and the Arctic, meaning there's a change in the differential...this has resulted in a measurable change in the current that makes the eastern US more temperate as well as much of Europe. These changes affect the polar winds as well. The loss of ice in the Arctic is causing the permafrost to melt, and that's releasing huge amounts of CO2 that were not in the models, so it's likely the predictions are under estimating the impacts. Keep in mind that heating water also expands it, and that is also creating a measurable ocean level rise. The glaciers in Antarctica are losing their logjams as the warmer ocean water is eroding them from below, meaning that they are not held back by the friction caused when they're butting up against islands, or seamounts. Some of them have increased their slide towards the ocean by a factor of over 100. If we melted all of the glaciers, the ocean levels would be nearly 100M higher...say goodbye to all of our big coastal cities. Venice, Italy spent billions on some moveable tidal gates to protect the city that were projected to be sufficient for many years...in the time it took to build them, they're already too low to protect the city from leap tides. Mankind doesn't seem to like change, and sort of like the ostrich, sometimes puts their head in the sand. We do not know the future for certain, but not having an open mind to see what is happening is dangerous...we need to consider the possibilities and mitigate their effects in an intelligent manner. |
06-17-2021, 04:50 PM | #74 |
Captain
446
Rep 810
Posts |
I'm not going to write an essay debating the merits of the Climate change debate, impact to the environment or whether its man made.
The fact is EV cars are here, and they are only going to get more popular - so I just accept it and move on. The one constant in life is change, so the momentum towards EVs is here to stay. The question is what will drive these EVs in the long term, pure batteries? ..or batteries with Fuel Cells? I think Hydrogen Fuel Cell (HFC) offers a lot of promise; especially around range, and will give pure battery (storage) powered EVs a good run for their money. I'm really excited that BMW have put Hydrogen Fuel cell power in an X5 EV, and I'll be watching the progress of the "real-life" testing with much interest. Its great that manufacturers are exploring different approaches to powering EVs, it will encourage innovation across both camps. I think a winner will emerge in the next 5-10 years; economics, innovation and Governments encouraging the associated infrastructure will dictate the result, maybe there's even room for both??? (eg. there's been gas/petrol, Diesel and LPG cars around for many years). Until then my trusty and proven 30d/Diesel will serve me well. Last edited by James_G0540i; 06-17-2021 at 04:58 PM.. |
06-17-2021, 07:02 PM | #75 |
Lieutenant General
18113
Rep 11,746
Posts
Drives: 2018 M4 Comp Indv
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Newport Beach
|
In general, for passenger car fuel, hydrogen has a lot of trade-offs for not much benefit, and is mostly pushed by Big Oil:
(1.) Said simply, electric cars have fewer steps from renewable power source to car engine - hydrogen fuel cells have more steps, thus less efficient (BEVs = 40%-70%, FCV = 23% - 33%) so there's no real reason for it* (2.) Hydrogen makes a GREAT long-term energy storage source, due to lots of energy BY WEIGHT, but VERY LITTLE BY VOLUME! That means where big tanks aren't a problem H2 is ideal (maybe a H2 tanker that brings H2 to rural areas to power electric stuff, like cars!) Start at 5:25 for an Engineering Explained comparison of the various auto fuels: *So, due to efficiency and given there are already EVs, there's no real reason for hydrogen passenger cars so why do we hear about it? Because much of the hydrogen industry are Big Oil looking to get the hydrogen from ... hydrocarbons, i.e., OIL! aka "grey hydrogen" And, duh, renewable hydrogen is WAY more expensive: And, duh, grey hydrogen is basically not different from burning gasoline (far worse in terms of CO2) - but it just might fool people into THINKING it's different: Net-net, sure hydrogen can work for passenger cars, but green hydrogen is pretty expensive, so the only reason it's being researched is because it's a way to keep mining and burning oil ... in which case it's just a more inefficient version of oil. If H2 is from green sources, then it probably makes the most sense for long-haul transportation to places that can't easily produce & transport electricity or need a sudden burst of energy. Otherwise it's just a more expensive & CO2-emitting version of oil.
__________________
Last edited by GrussGott; 06-17-2021 at 07:12 PM.. |
Appreciate
5
|
06-17-2021, 07:14 PM | #76 |
Major General
3127
Rep 6,728
Posts |
Hydrogen doesn't make a lot of sense unless you have a readily available supply of green hydrogen. We may get there, but it will take an excess capacity of green electricity to do it. Fuel cell efficiency will improve with time, too. To be viable, a FC vehicle will still need a battery in the interim to provide peak, instantaneous power, you don't want to pay for in today's FC stack.
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-17-2021, 09:23 PM | #78 | |
Captain
446
Rep 810
Posts |
Quote:
Example, look at where motors & engines have come from the 1970s-80 gas guzzlers to where they are today. That was driven by the fear of running out of oil & general air-quality/pollution. Today we have the "climate change" fear (myth or not....) and that fear is going to drive some interesting developments over the next 10 years. So watch this space... I just want a car that does 800km on "one charge" or fill-up, and has a reliable option to "Re-charge" or refill at the other end, and I think that's what most people out there want too. |
|
06-17-2021, 10:02 PM | #79 |
Captain
1212
Rep 774
Posts |
Someone kill this thread. The political name calling from the peanut gallery is more embarrassingly childish than the G8x grill debate*
* I hate those fucking grills. |
06-18-2021, 12:20 AM | #80 | |
Lieutenant General
18113
Rep 11,746
Posts
Drives: 2018 M4 Comp Indv
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Newport Beach
|
Quote:
That said, climate change not the primary fear driving EVs, at least not the Western (or Eastern) governments ... The primary fear is National Security from China & Russia - and this fear will be driving innovation in all of the places China is actively seeking dominance: (1.) AI (2.) Communications (5G) (3.) Robotics (4.) Energy & Transportation (Li-ion & EVs) (5.) Space dominance So with Space, most people agree we can't have communists & authoritarians dominating orbital territory ... and most people agree, like our military, the government needs to fund & manage it ... and to do that most people favor government contracts for milestone based products like reusable rockets... However, the US & Euro governments aren't going to publicly say: "Hey citizens, China invented the EV industry out of whole cloth in order to flank our energy industry and dominate transportation so we've got to dominate first" In the case of EVs, we didn't even need product-milestone government contracts - just a few loans and some tax relief (which have cost WAY less than the $10B to bailout the US auto industry) - and we let US entrepreneurs do the rest. Net-net: Western EV development is about not losing strategic advantage in energy & transportation first ... and the rest of the stuff second. |
|
Appreciate
1
Stoshu491.00 |
06-18-2021, 04:01 AM | #81 | |
Private First Class
36
Rep 176
Posts
Drives: 2019 BMW 330i
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Irvine
|
Quote:
Another problem is overconsumption by humans. That's a tricky one to solve as more and more humans inhabit the planet. However, people are at least being made aware of it. |
|
Appreciate
2
MadBimmeRad7107.00 BMWFLYNN54.00 |
06-18-2021, 06:15 AM | #82 | ||
Colonel
2352
Rep 2,614
Posts |
Quote:
By the way, technology is progressing and here is the head of BMW engineering..:they are doing stuff like EV because they think it'll lead to better cars vs political reasons. https://apple.news/AeeOXzxdtTYqvaanwR7NLmQ |
||
Appreciate
1
GrussGott18113.00 |
06-18-2021, 08:38 AM | #83 | |
BMW Aficionado
1344
Rep 1,817
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-18-2021, 08:39 AM | #84 |
BMW Aficionado
1344
Rep 1,817
Posts |
|
Appreciate
3
|
06-18-2021, 08:27 PM | #85 |
Major General
3127
Rep 6,728
Posts |
You get into the classic chicken or egg problem...people won't buy FCV in any numbers until there are ways to refuel them, and the infrastructure doesn't evolve until there's a demand unless someone intervenes to help out. That's where government can help fund some research and development.
BMW, Toyota, Hyundai, Mercedes and maybe some others are pushing things by testing various FCV, hoping to prove that they can actually work. Same thing with some green energy sources. The costs of things like solar cells and windmills have come down quite a bit, and compact nuclear power plants are ready to start up except for the bad perceptions they have with the public. |
Appreciate
2
MadBimmeRad7107.00 Stoshu491.00 |
06-19-2021, 12:21 PM | #86 | |
Captain
491
Rep 744
Posts |
Quote:
Currently nuclear would provide enough clean power but its stigma and waste disposal issues are large hurdles to leap in the United States. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-19-2021, 12:51 PM | #87 | |
Banned
429
Rep 756
Posts |
Quote:
Lets force people to buy EVs that they can't always recharge, makes all the sense in the world out there in CA. |
|
Appreciate
1
volodp193.50 |
06-19-2021, 03:04 PM | #88 |
Major General
3127
Rep 6,728
Posts |
The CHADEMO system was designed to enable bi-directional power flow. CCS was not, but it could be added. A big fleet of EVs with bi-directional power flow could provide a HUGE buffer for exceptional situations.
Where there is reliable solar (i.e., few cloudy days), there aren't all that many people NOR is there the power distribution system to carry it where it would need to go. Those areas also tend to be sparse on water, so using that space to produce hydrogen isn't viable, either. Places where there's lots of water tend to also have more cloudy days. Solar still works there, but it's not as efficient. There's more than enough wind, solar, and tidal energy to power the world, but moving it where it needs to go requires big improvements in infrastructure. Building test fleet of FCV is still a good idea to get the kinks out. We'll probably get to the point on battery tech where they can be recharged quite quickly, there are prototypes out there now, but that huge spike on the power grid will need some significant engineering. Using hydrogen, generated when the grid load is down, storing it, and being able to refill the vehicle in minutes has a huge appeal, and none of the peak power demands batteries have when recharging. Time will tell how this all works out in the end. I like the idea of FCV, but even with EVs...we're not ready for prime time yet which is why I got a PHEV...EV for me most of the time, rapid refill when needed, and just keep going. This comes at a cost...two drivetrains, extra weight, and maintenance on two systems. Throw in the NIMBY effects, and making the required changes get tougher. |
Appreciate
1
BMWFLYNN54.00 |
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|