Dyson EV

[Evanivitch]

Heres Johnny said:

Define "Battery"

One definition (cambridge) is "a device that produces electricity to provide power for radios, cars, etc" sometimes the word "cell" is included, so by that regard a fuel cell is a battery when installed in a car.

Um, not really. A hydrogen fuel tank is equivalent to a battery. A Hydrogen Fuel Cell is equivalent to a Battery Management/Power Distribution system. A HFC doesn't store energy.

[Evanivitch]

DonkeyApple said:

The car world is never going to be powered predominantly by Li batteries and it will be interesting to see what comes along to make them totally redundant as a store of electricity and how long that takes.

I agree the world won't be, but grid storage doesn't need to use Li to be effective. It can compromise more on weight and energy density as well as many other factors.

But Li will remain dominant in the automotive battery sector for at least a few decades yet. And when something new is identified, it'll be another decade before it is able to be manufactured in large capacity.

[WestyCarl]

DonkeyApple said:

I never mention hydrogen other than to point out that petrol is superior. Something may come out of the blue that suddenly makes hydrogen viable but I don’t know why it keeps being mentioned on PH as a current viable option.

Not sure it's been mentioned as a current viable option but a potential for the future.

(Honda provided a fleet of Hydrgoen cars to ferry the VIP's around during 2012 Olympics, however a few weeks out they realized there was no Hydrogen refueling in London so had transporters ship them back to Swindon for re-filling overnight )

However apart from ICE and BEV's it's also the main alternative fuel development the car makers are working on.

[Heres Johnny]

Evanivitch said:

Heres Johnny said:

Define "Battery"

One definition (cambridge) is "a device that produces electricity to provide power for radios, cars, etc" sometimes the word "cell" is included, so by that regard a fuel cell is a battery when installed in a car.

Um, not really. A hydrogen fuel tank is equivalent to a battery. A Hydrogen Fuel Cell is equivalent to a Battery Management/Power Distribution system. A HFC doesn't store energy.

That’s the trouble with definitions... define Cell.. the definition just talks about something contains cells that power’s cars, the fact with hydrogen the cell isn’t like a Li cell is a moot point

[Evanivitch]

Heres Johnny said:

That’s the trouble with definitions... define Cell.. the definition just talks about something contains cells that power’s cars, the fact with hydrogen the cell isn’t like a Li cell is a moot point

You're just conflating fuel cells and battery cells. Both are easily defined at a technical level.

[anonymous-user]

Dyson confirmed last week in an interview, the car will be battery powered. No hydrogen this time round.

Maybe someday .

[Heres Johnny]

Evanivitch said:

Heres Johnny said:

That’s the trouble with definitions... define Cell.. the definition just talks about something contains cells that power’s cars, the fact with hydrogen the cell isn’t like a Li cell is a moot point

You're just conflating fuel cells and battery cells. Both are easily defined at a technical level.

My point is what’s a battery, depending on the definition it’s just a mobile source of electricity. You can define a wide variety of battery cells too, and lithium ion may not be the type we use in the future, who knows, which was my original point. What we have today may be nothing like what we use in the future. Simply saying we’ll use batteries in the future means nothing or is all consuming depending on what you mean by battery.

[98elise]

Heres Johnny said:

Evanivitch said:

Who's carrying a 1000kg of batteries?

Maybe an exaggeration but how the hell does a Tesla get to be well over 2 ton with no engine?

You know it has a motor and gearbox though?

A model 3 is not much heavier than its peers, and in EV's weight isn't as much of an issue that in ICE

[98elise]

Heres Johnny said:

Evanivitch said:

Heres Johnny said:

That’s the trouble with definitions... define Cell.. the definition just talks about something contains cells that power’s cars, the fact with hydrogen the cell isn’t like a Li cell is a moot point

You're just conflating fuel cells and battery cells. Both are easily defined at a technical level.

My point is what’s a battery, depending on the definition it’s just a mobile source of electricity. You can define a wide variety of battery cells too, and lithium ion may not be the type we use in the future, who knows, which was my original point. What we have today may be nothing like what we use in the future. Simply saying we’ll use batteries in the future means nothing or is all consuming depending on what you mean by battery.

A battery is one or more cells. Cells are energy stores

Hydrogen is an energy store, just a very bad one.

[DonkeyApple]

98elise said:

You know it has a motor and gearbox though?

A model 3 is not much heavier than its peers, and in EV's weight isn't as much of an issue that in ICE

Does remind me that at Prescott hill climb last Sunday I watched a Tesla S understeer quite loudly.

[RobDickinson]

WestyCarl said:

Working in the auto industry I'll disagree with that.

Also battery tech has evolved significantly in the last 15yrs due to the rise in consumer tech (laptops, phones, etc)

Battery tech, cells, yes but that wasn't the auto industry, and I said bev vehicles not cells.

Battery cars (Lithium ones) started as a byproduct of other industries.

Whilst fcev have had decades of pure dedicated research

[V10 SPM]

jjwilde said:

Phil. said:

Do you have an intelligent opinion to share?

Yes. Hydrogen is an inefficient 80s tech which is a dead end. It's over. There is a reason they are called foolcells.

13000 orders for the Nikola Tre to date...

[jjwilde]

V10 SPM said:

13000 orders for the Nikola Tre to date...

Unless you can change the laws of physics hydrogen is always going to be a terrible way to move a vehicle unless we're talking rockets.

[RobDickinson]

https://insideevs.com/news/342378/hydrogen-fuel-ce...

We were promised by some Asian manufacturers that hydrogen fuel cell cars are the future, but as we check the numbers for 2018, it seems that sales are not only meaningless, but also haven't changed much over the year.

The total volume seems to be above 2,300, similar to 2017, which is not even 1% of the number noted by plug-in electric cars (361,307).

The most "popular" FCV - the Toyota Mirai noted 1,700 deliveries, which is 7.5% less than a year earlier.
Toyota Mirai - 1,700 (down 7.5% from 1,838)
Honda Clarity Fuel Cell - 624 (up from 431 a year ago, according to our estimations)
Hyundai NEXO - 8 (first was delivered in December)
Hyundai Tucson Fuel Cell - no data
Total: about 2,332 (vs. 2,269)

[ruggedscotty]

Hydrogen needs to be produced and transported to the vending point - has to be specific pumps to pump hydrogen into a vehicle....

This.

Petrol companies are desperate to get something as close to a fuel as they can so that they can keep their infrastructure. car companies want complexity of engines convertors anything that requires regular maintenance to maintain service and consumables.

Hydrogen is wrong on many levels -

Go with electricity - is clean at point of use, it meets with 99% of out needs - how many of us are doing more than a commute ? You don't need to recharge all at one time just enough to get you home, recharge at night etc etc.

Electricity is they way forward rechargeable battery leads not those other stupid ideas. do we want VHS Betamax all over again ?

[DonkeyApple]

It’s even simpler than that, world governments are not backing hydrogen with taxpayer funds. Global investment capital is not backing hydrogen.

[jjwilde]

I mean this has been coming up on pistonheads every few months now for years. People just don't seem to understand what hydrogen is and how it works in a car.

I'm still pretty sure this all goes back to that stupid TopGear episode on it which said it was the future. People literally quote James May on it even though he has since said he was wrong and he now owns an EV.

[Phil.]

jjwilde said:

I mean this has been coming up on pistonheads every few months now for years. People just don't seem to understand what hydrogen is and how it works in a car.

I'm still pretty sure this all goes back to that stupid TopGear episode on it which said it was the future. People literally quote James May on it even though he has since said he was wrong and he now owns an EV.

Genuine question. Why are some of the big car companies still spending their resources developing hydrogen, Mercedes for example?

[EddieSteadyGo]

Phil. said:

Genuine question. Why are some of the big car companies still spending their resources developing hydrogen, Mercedes for example?

They must be stupid (according to some of the logic on here).

I'm no expert on hydrogen, and I've read the various list of issues. It still seems to be me there are a number of use cases for hydrogen, perhaps where you need zero emissions, *very* large batteries, and want to keep the upfront capital costs as low as possible (and so are prepared to accept the lower efficiency of hydrogen as a fuel together with the other well documented issues).

[98elise]

EddieSteadyGo said:

Phil. said:

Genuine question. Why are some of the big car companies still spending their resources developing hydrogen, Mercedes for example?

They must be stupid (according to some of the logic on here).

I'm no expert on hydrogen, and I've read the various list of issues. It still seems to be me there are a number of use cases for hydrogen, perhaps where you need zero emissions, *very* large batteries, and want to keep the upfront capital costs as low as possible (and so are prepared to accept the lower efficiency of hydrogen as a fuel together with the other well documented issues).

The up front capital costs are not low though. Hydrogen cars are both expensive to buy, and to run.