Would you wait 45 minutes when filling up to get it free?

[rscott]

SimonYorkshire said:

Max_Torque said:

SimonYorkshire said:

Not much more of an issue storing H at 700 bar than storing CNG,

Physics Fail 1

SimonYorkshire said:

I could convert any carb or port injected ice engine to run on H using most of the same components I'd use to convert a carb/port injection ice engine to LPG or CNG

Physics Fail 2


(Hint: Google "high pressure hydrogen embrittlement" for why you can't actually do either of those things)

I just Googled 'High pressure hydrogen embrittlement'' and then I Googled 'Composite hydrogen tanks'. And found this website https://www.ems-evolves.com/pressure-vessels/?gcli...

I'm sure you'll have known hydrogen tanks are available for cars! I did say I would need to fit a different reducer, tank and piping to make an ice car run on hydrogen.

Why would you want to convert any car to hydrogen anyway ? It's incredibly inefficient, even compared to ICE, let alone EVs.

[Ares]

SimonYorkshire said:

kambites said:

SimonYorkshire said:

How does the situation look after government have applied road duty to electricity used to charge an EV...

It doesn't because they wont because they aren't entirely stupid. When the government needs to raise more duty from personal road transport because of falling petrol/diesel sales it will not be by introducing further taxes on EV "fuel".

Really? How do you know? If that is true, how will the revenue currently raised from duty on ice fuels be raised then?

Tax on EVs already is being introduced. This time last year you could buy a Tesla and pay no road tax. Now you pay £450/yr.

The house always wins

[SimonYorkshire]

CubanPete said:

Not very PH, but I certainly don't net £80 for 45 minutes work.

I'd be waiting.

If you don't already own an EV, you've got to buy one first.

TA14 said:

SimonYorkshire said:

kambites said:

SimonYorkshire said:

How does the situation look after government have applied road duty to electricity used to charge an EV...

It doesn't because they wont because they aren't entirely stupid. When the government needs to raise more duty from personal road transport because of falling petrol/diesel sales it will not be by introducing further taxes on EV "fuel".

Really? How do you know? If that is true, how will the revenue currently raised from duty on ice fuels be raised then?

It's difficult enough keeping track of red diesel. How will they know what you use your electricity for? Kams is right, it'll be RFL, or road charging or MoTs or something else.

The rate of charge possible from a domestic plug socket is only 3kw, which would take 10 hours to charge an average EV 30kwh battery (at 100% charge efficiency) or 33 hours to charge a 100kwh Tesla battery (at 100% efficiency). So it's either your 45 minute charge isn't really possible, or you need a special socket at home to charge more quickly. And , incidentally, even then it won't be possible to charge a 100kwh battery in 45 minutes at home because your home power supply could not support that. This special socket you have at home (that still takes longer than 45 minutes to charge) could be connected to it's own meter.. hardly rocket science to implement that and in fact EV enthusiasts are already talking about using Economy7 type electricity pricing schemes and hoping such facility will allow them to charge their car even cheaper at night. E7 type charging schemes might make it cheaper to recharge your EV at night but just as easily could charge various rates of duty at different times of the day. When you recharge on a forecourt or from a lamp post it is rather obvious what the electricity is being used for, On a forecourt you might pay at the pump or go inside to pay, regardless duty could easily be included in your bill. Perhaps lamp posts will have cash card machines built in, perhaps you'll never be able to charge at a lamp post.

[SimonYorkshire]

GT119 said:

SimonYorkshire said:

Battery powered EVs have so many flaws too!

Here is a list of components that are not required in a BEV:
Fuel tank
Fuel system
Engine
Gearbox
Prop shaft
Exhaust system / catalyst / DPF, etc.

Replaced by:
Battery
Power electronics
Motor/s (which may require a sealed fixed-ratio gearbox)

In the long term, when production volumes are mature, the BEV will be significantly more reliable, cheaper to manufacture and have much lower maintenance requirements.

The BEV also has regenerative braking capability built in which provides a step-change improvement in efficiency.
This has a knock-on benefit of vastly increasing brake disc/pad life.
As far as vehicle dynamics and safety go: 4WD/torque vectoring/traction and stability control are very easily implemented.

Then there is the question of performance, NVH, refinement, etc.
Again the BEV is inherently better.

From an engineering standpoint it is by far the most advanced and fit-for-purpose way to propel a vehicle.

You don't know if, when or how batteries will get any better. I agree EVs need fewer parts and electric motors are very reliable, I don't agree that EV batteries are reliable. Industry is already geared up for ice production, most of the metal from scrap cars and ice's are already recycled, ice's don't need better electrical infrastructure or more power stations to be built.

I disagree with 'from an engineering standpoint (EVs are) by far the most fit for purpose way to propel a vehicle' due to the battery and electrical infrastructure points and due to slow recharge time. The more you solve the recharge time issue (if possible), the bigger the problem for electrical infrastructure becomes. In my last post I touched on the subject of it not being possible to recharge a 100kwh battery in 45 minutes from a home power supply - You would need the combined power supply of about 5 houses to be able to do that. If you get charge down for this same car down to 10 minutes now you need the combined power supply of 20 houses.

rscott said:

Why would you want to convert any car to hydrogen anyway ? It's incredibly inefficient, even compared to ICE, let alone EVs.

It doesn't matter how inefficient something (a process / a car) is if you have an endless clean supply of the thing that powers it. This also means regenerative braking wouldn't be an advantage, especially if to build in regenerative braking you had to fit heavy unreliable low capacity batteries.

GT119 said:

Unknown depreciation/devaluation: 95% of new cars are bought on finance with known costs at the outset, why will that change with EVs?

Hydrogen embrittlement probably applies to the engine internals as much as the fuel system, did you consider that?

How do you implement regenerative braking to a hydrogen powered vehicle? Of course I know the answer to that one, you add a motor, power converter and a battery.

All of your epiphanies have been considered and analysed to death by manufacturers and authorities over the last few decades. The BEV won, its game over Simon.

For ice cars depreciation is a fairly well known quantity, you can effectively devalue an ice car by doing above average mileage in it or abusing it but devaluation isn't really a factor except when the newer spec version of the same model is introduced. EVs could be devalued by future advances in battery tech.

Wikipedia suggests hydrogen embrittlement applies long term to tanks storing high pressure pure hydrogen, an engine doesn't ever get pure high pressure hydrogen and the moment it does see high pressure the hydrogen is almost immediately burned. During the burn process (in an engine) of any fuel (because fuels are all hydrocarbons) there may be a moment when some hydrogen is released from the HC anyway. And it is possible to build a hydrogen ice and run it long term without any embrittlement issues.

It is way too early to say the BEV has won anything, you need to wait and see how it pans out - and see how people get on with lack of range, long charge times and possible restrictions on charging at certain times of the day. The game will run at least until 2050, at the moment EVs are a niche and not many of the problems I discuss have much of an effect while they are a niche.

I answered regenerative braking for H cars above - Why bother with regenerative braking and batteries etc if your ice runs totally cleanly on extremely cheaply produced and widely available H ?

Edited by SimonYorkshire on Thursday 28th September 12:55

[98elise]

SimonYorkshire said:

CubanPete said:

Not very PH, but I certainly don't net £80 for 45 minutes work.

I'd be waiting.

If you don't already own an EV, you've got to buy one first.

TA14 said:

SimonYorkshire said:

kambites said:

SimonYorkshire said:

How does the situation look after government have applied road duty to electricity used to charge an EV...

It doesn't because they wont because they aren't entirely stupid. When the government needs to raise more duty from personal road transport because of falling petrol/diesel sales it will not be by introducing further taxes on EV "fuel".

Really? How do you know? If that is true, how will the revenue currently raised from duty on ice fuels be raised then?

It's difficult enough keeping track of red diesel. How will they know what you use your electricity for? Kams is right, it'll be RFL, or road charging or MoTs or something else.

The rate of charge possible from a domestic plug socket is only 3kw, which would take 10 hours to charge an average EV 30kwh battery (at 100% charge efficiency) or 33 hours to charge a 100kwh Tesla battery (at 100% efficiency). So it's either your 45 minute charge isn't really possible, or you need a special socket at home to charge more quickly. And , incidentally, even then it won't be possible to charge a 100kwh battery in 45 minutes at home because your home power supply could not support that. This special socket you have at home (that still takes longer than 45 minutes to charge) could be connected to it's own meter.. hardly rocket science to implement that and in fact EV enthusiasts are already talking about using Economy7 type electricity pricing schemes and hoping such facility will allow them to charge their car even cheaper at night. E7 type charging schemes might make it cheaper to recharge your EV at night but just as easily could charge various rates of duty at different times of the day. When you recharge on a forecourt or from a lamp post it is rather obvious what the electricity is being used for, On a forecourt you might pay at the pump or go inside to pay, regardless duty could easily be included in your bill. Perhaps lamp posts will have cash card machines built in, perhaps you'll never be able to charge at a lamp post.

How will they know if I use my PV to change my BEV? Electricity can be produced from any other for of energy so trying to tax charging will not work.

The future of tax is not fuel/energy duty. It will be in road pricing.

[Shakermaker]

SimonYorkshire said:

You don't know if, when or how batteries will get any better. I agree EVs need fewer parts and electric motors are very reliable, I don't agree that EV batteries are reliable. Industry is already geared up for ice production, most of the metal from scrap cars and ice's are already recycled, ice's don't need better electrical infrastructure or more power stations to be built.

I disagree with 'from an engineering standpoint (EVs are) by far the most fit for purpose way to propel a vehicle' due to the battery and electrical infrastructure points and due to slow recharge time. The more you solve the recharge time issue (if possible), the bigger the problem for electrical infrastructure becomes. In my last post I touched on the subject of it not being possible to recharge a 100kwh battery in 45 minutes from a home power supply - You would need the combined power supply of about 5 houses to be able to do that. If you get charge down for this same car down to 10 minutes now you need the combined power supply of 20 houses.

How quickly can you fill up your ICE car with fuel at home?

You aren't comparing like with like here.

[Donbot]

I don't see why people are still bothering with Simon. The guy is clearly an idiot / troll / not reading peoples replies.

[rscott]

SimonYorkshire said:

rscott said:

Why would you want to convert any car to hydrogen anyway ? It's incredibly inefficient, even compared to ICE, let alone EVs.

It doesn't matter how inefficient something (a process / a car) is if you have an endless clean supply of the thing that powers it. This also means regenerative braking wouldn't be an advantage, especially if to build in regenerative braking you had to fit heavy unreliable low capacity batteries.

Question for you - how do you get the 'endless clean supply' of hydrogen? Answer - you use energy (lots of it) to extract it from water.

[SimonYorkshire]

rscott said:

Question for you - how do you get the 'endless clean supply' of hydrogen? Answer - you use energy (lots of it) to extract it from water.

From nuclear fusion power stations, which still need to be invented, the development of which could be speeded up if you weren't spending money on upgrading electrical infrastructure and developing batteries.

Question for you, how do you produce electricity to charge EVs? You burn ice fuel or build more fission power stations.

[SimonYorkshire]

98elise said:

How will they know if I use my PV to change my BEV? Electricity can be produced from any other for of energy so trying to tax charging will not work.

The future of tax is not fuel/energy duty. It will be in road pricing.

Who says?

[rscott]

SimonYorkshire said:

rscott said:

Question for you - how do you get the 'endless clean supply' of hydrogen? Answer - you use energy (lots of it) to extract it from water.

From nuclear fusion power stations, which still need to be invented, the development of which could be speeded up if you weren't spending money on upgrading electrical infrastructure and developing batteries.

Question for you, how do you produce electricity to charge EVs? You burn ice fuel or build more fission power stations.

Or hydroelectric, or solar, wind. Or even import clean hydro energy from Norway, as it currently being proposed.

LPG conversion trade slow today - you seem to have plenty of time to post rubbish.

[InitialDave]

I think most of the dedicated home charging units have some form of data uplink in them, so they can tell what's being used. I seem to recall when mine was fitted, a reasonable mobile data signal was a prerequisite for installation.

Ok, you'll never be able to properly meter people using a normal 13A plug (unless you do something to the car or cable to provide that data), but I suspect such charging behaviour is in the minority.

[otolith]

SimonYorkshire said:

From nuclear fusion power stations, which still need to be invented, the development of which could be speeded up if you weren't spending money on upgrading electrical infrastructure and developing batteries.

Current estimates suggest that fusion power will be of comparable cost to fission power. There are other advantages, but fusion plants will still be very expensive to build and run. The idea that it's a magic bullet which will allow you to be outrageously profligate with energy that's too cheap to meter is a fantasy. Who is going to pay ten times more per mile for being able to refill faster? It's retarded.

[GT119]

SimonYorkshire said:

More stuff

Simon, I do admire your persistence!

You previously mentioned me as one of those digging up dirt on you, just to reiterate that I have not done anything along those lines and I was supportive of you earning a living from LPG conversions.

We will have to agree to disagree on how the future will pan out.

If you remove the issue of battery charging, present cost, and human emotion, and then just compare a BEV to a vehicle with an engine, there are so many advantages to the BEV in terms of simplicity/reliability/packaging/maintenance/dynamics and of course efficiency that any sane decision makers cannot look elsewhere (and they are not). Your claim that batteries are unreliable (relative to the alternatives) is also weak in my opinion, the evidence just isn't there.

Battery cost will come down when production volumes are high enough, just like everything else produced in massive quantities, it's purely a matter of time.

The charging issue will also get solved, none of the challenges are insurmountable, and the wheels are already in motion everywhere you look.

As for human emotion, lets consider what happens when the average punter walks into a dealership in 3 to 5 years time. There will be almost no diesels for sale and maybe a few petrols, BEVs will be scattered around the showroom, as will hybrids, the salespeople will be forcing the hybrids/BEVs down your throat with affordable monthlies and much lower running costs. As time goes on the hybrids will reduce and the IC engines only vehicles will become special order, do you honestly think it will go any other way.

[languagetimothy]

If all electric cars used the same battery model and mounting system, that can easily be removed with some clever automated equipment charging and range would be less of a problem. Just drive into a station (perhaps used to be a petrol station) park up to a system that unclips the used battery and replaces it with a fully charged one, then puts the old one on charge, pay... off you go in minutes. Bit like changing a battery in say a phone but on a bigger scale.
I know it's a bit more complicated that that because of where the batteries are at the moment and the size, but probably doesn't have to be if the car makers worked together to come up with uniform battery and connection.

[GT119]

languagetimothy said:

If all electric cars used the same battery model and mounting system, that can easily be removed with some clever automated equipment charging and range would be less of a problem. Just drive into a station (perhaps used to be a petrol station) park up to a system that unclips the used battery and replaces it with a fully charged one, then puts the old one on charge, pay... off you go in minutes. Bit like changing a battery in say a phone but on a bigger scale.
I know it's a bit more complicated that that because of where the batteries are at the moment and the size, but probably doesn't have to be if the car makers worked together to come up with uniform battery and connection.

The problem is not technical but commercial.
It's an issue of the value of and responsibility for the asset, as battery packs will always be a significant proportion of the vehicle value.
So who owns each battery pack?
The owner will be the one responsible for the battery, any maintenance or repair issues that arise and any third party consequential claims that could arise from failure, etc. Or they will have to contractually pass these responsibilities onto users, requiring prior legal arrangements to be made.
If the pack is damaged in the course of its use by negligence or other reasons it may be difficult to track down who was at fault if they are continually being swapped out with different users.
So its gets quite complicated with the whole legal/insurance angle.
My guess is most businesses probably won't want them on their balance sheet.
If you get a dud, then you need to change it out, inform the owner, etc., it's just too much hassle IMO.

[Ares]

GT119 said:

languagetimothy said:

If all electric cars used the same battery model and mounting system, that can easily be removed with some clever automated equipment charging and range would be less of a problem. Just drive into a station (perhaps used to be a petrol station) park up to a system that unclips the used battery and replaces it with a fully charged one, then puts the old one on charge, pay... off you go in minutes. Bit like changing a battery in say a phone but on a bigger scale.
I know it's a bit more complicated that that because of where the batteries are at the moment and the size, but probably doesn't have to be if the car makers worked together to come up with uniform battery and connection.

The problem is not technical but commercial.
It's an issue of the value of and responsibility for the asset, as battery packs will always be a significant proportion of the vehicle value.
So who owns each battery pack?
The owner will be the one responsible for the battery, any maintenance or repair issues that arise and any third party consequential claims that could arise from failure, etc. Or they will have to contractually pass these responsibilities onto users, requiring prior legal arrangements to be made.
If the pack is damaged in the course of its use by negligence or other reasons it may be difficult to track down who was at fault if they are continually being swapped out with different users.
So its gets quite complicated with the whole legal/insurance angle.
My guess is most businesses probably won't want them on their balance sheet.
If you get a dud, then you need to change it out, inform the owner, etc., it's just too much hassle IMO.

If thats the way it goes, it'll become an industry standard. See Betamax Vs VHS.

As for ownership, no reason why it can't follow a calorie gas model initial rental included in with the purchase of the car.

[SimonYorkshire]

rscott said:

SimonYorkshire said:

rscott said:

Question for you - how do you get the 'endless clean supply' of hydrogen? Answer - you use energy (lots of it) to extract it from water.

From nuclear fusion power stations, which still need to be invented, the development of which could be speeded up if you weren't spending money on upgrading electrical infrastructure and developing batteries.

Question for you, how do you produce electricity to charge EVs? You burn ice fuel or build more fission power stations.

Or hydroelectric, or solar, wind. Or even import clean hydro energy from Norway, as it currently being proposed.

LPG conversion trade slow today - you seem to have plenty of time to post rubbish.

I had a relatively slow day yesterday because I got in front with work earlier in the week. Not that you're in a position to know anything about the hours I work or how busy I am just because I found time to post on a forum. And I don't post rubbish.

If Norway allow us to use their hydroelectric power, how would Norway switch to EVs? Not that Norway's hydroelectric power would be enough to charge all EVs in the UK anyway. Same with wind power and solar, not enough and never will or could be enough.

We don't know if fusion power will ever be invented or how expensive it will be if it is. But some scientists reckon it could become readily available, totally clean and extremely cheap to produce... and, if so, hydrogen powered ice vehicles could be more viable than EVs. Batteries have been used, important and necessary for a long time and in all that time the performance hasn't improved at anything like the rate of other technologies, nobody can say if it will be possible to produce batteries that are much better than today's lithium batteries or when. Even if better batteries are produced, without fusion power you will still need to burn ice fuels or build fission power plants to power ice vehicles. Another point about fusion power is that home heating could then become electric instead of involving using an ice fuel burning boiler in most homes... With no more strain on the grid than if people charge EVs at home overnight... Unless of course you wanted to charge an EV at home and heat your home using electricity.

Edited by SimonYorkshire on Friday 29th September 14:55

[rscott]

SimonYorkshire said:

I had a relatively slow day yesterday because I got in front with work earlier in the week. Not that you're in a position to know anything about the hours I work or how busy I am just because I found time to post on a forum. And I don't post rubbish.

If Norway allow us to use their hydroelectric power, how would Norway switch to EVs? Not that Norway's hydroelectric power would be enough to charge all EVs in the UK anyway. Same with wind power and solar, not enough and never will or could be enough.

We don't know if fusion power will ever be invented or how expensive it will be if it is. But some scientists reckon it could become readily available, totally clean and extremely cheap to produce... and, if so, hydrogen powered ice vehicles could be more viable than EVs. Batteries have been used, important and necessary for a long time and in all that time the performance hasn't improved at anything like the rate of other technologies, nobody can say if it will be possible to produce batteries that are much better than today's lithium batteries or when. Even if better batteries are produced, without fusion power you will still need to burn ice fuels or build fission power plants to power ice vehicles. Another point about fusion power is that home heating could then become electric instead of involving using an ice fuel burning boiler in most homes... With no more strain on the grid than if people charge EVs at home overnight... Unless of course you wanted to charge an EV at home and heat your home using electricity.

Edited by SimonYorkshire on Friday 29th September 14:55

[GT119]

Simon, why do you keep saying that batteries need to get better?
Agreed, it would be a nice to have, but the reality is, they are already good enough to produce a 200-300 mile range class leading car.
That range is good enough for most people, which is what matters.
They just need to get cheaper, which is purely a volume production issue.
Can you not see that? (for the hundredth time)
The technology is already good enough here and now.
Mercedes have seen the Tesla technology and are investing billions in a me-too manufacturing plant.
All the other manufacturers will be along shortly with their EV plans, some are already gearing up for production next year, like Jaguar.
Porsche is bringing out a full EV in two years.
You can expect it to blow everyone away with it's performance, handling and practicality.

If fusion ever took off, by that point, EVs will be fully adopted and far more developed than they are now.
Great, then EVs are going to even cheaper to run and less polluting.
You would have to be certifiable to then expect a u-turn to a hydrogen-based economy with more complex vehicles with a far higher parts count that will therefore cost more to manufacture, be less compact for the same interior space and be much less efficient.

Your picture of the world in a sleepy Yorkshire village is so far removed from what is actually happening in the major population centres of the developed world, I suggest you travel more if you really want to see first hand what is actually happening.