Hydrogen availability

[JonnyVTEC]

GT119 said:

20 million BEVs require around 6GW averaged power.
This assumes charging is spread evenly amongst them and based on an annual average of 8000 miles.
This is less than 10% of UK installed capacity. If you allow for a reduction of electrical power consumption elsewhere due to the avoided fossil fuel production, processing and distribution, it could be around half that.
What numbers did you get?

Seems logical to me. Now the story for hydrogen seems to involve a cow called Daisy and 5 magic beans from what I can see, or the simpler one of taking the figures above and multiplying by 3.

VK chap.
I can’t really add much more as requested, i won’t gain much from it when the audience is so deaf. I’m an engineer so simply see things too much as they are.. and can’t ride the euphoria of ignorance being bliss

[JonnyVTEC]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Honestly the fact you talk of supercharging to 100% shows you simply don’t know the subject matter well enough to try arguing one side of the fence.... you need to be able to see both the fields first!

[98elise]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Be sure to present your figures to the National Grid, but I think they know what they are talking about.

Put it this way. The average driver in the UK needs 7kWh per day. That's like running a hob for an hour, or an electric shower for about 40 minutes.

Now factor in that the average car will actually be sat for 10-12 hours overnight and the average draw drops to less than it takes to run my garden lighting.

Anywhere there is electricity you can charge. Tesla's have an on board charger so all you actually need is a power socket if you're happy with slow charging.

You think FCEV has a future because it can currently refill quicker. There is no reason why batteries can get faster, and more energy dense. Then there are options like flow batteries, or battery swap.

FCEV is a dead end. Even a hybrid with a biofuel ICE makes more sense.

[anonymous-user]

98elise said:

Be sure to present your figures to the National Grid, but I think they know what they are talking about.

The National Grid talk a good talk - but the DNOs aren't on the same page, they're really struggling to get all this excess power to where it's needed.

I've done some consulting with people looking to install 50 and 150kW chargers over the last few years - it's very hard to get any reasonable return on investment (you're talking 10-20 years) and some of the quotes I've had to upgrade grid supply have been laughable. As in, I could flatten the site and build a block of apartments for less.

Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 27th October 23:30

[anonymous-user]

JonnyVTEC said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Honestly the fact you talk of supercharging to 100% shows you simply don’t know the subject matter well enough to try arguing one side of the fence.... you need to be able to see both the fields first!

You're so weird! The conclusions you come to. You must be reading with your eyes closed.
WHERE
DID
I
SAY
I
THOUGHT
A
BEV
COULD
BE
SUPERCHARGED
TO
100%?

[anonymous-user]

GT119 said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

20 million BEVs require around 6GW averaged power.
This assumes charging is spread evenly amongst them and based on an annual average of 8000 miles.
This is less than 10% of UK installed capacity. If you allow for a reduction of electrical power consumption elsewhere due to the avoided fossil fuel production, processing and distribution, it could be around half that.
What numbers did you get?

Interesting, thanks!
So when we are 100% BEV you think there'll be 20 million cars on the road? I'm interested to know where you get that figure from?
Sorry, correction, the grid quote mentioned if we all went BEV now. So how many cars do you think are on the road in the UK today?

Show you're workings where you've got from 20million BEVs to an average 6GW.

Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 27th October 23:29

[GT119]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

20 million is just a reference point for the halfway point or thereabouts, when we are fully BEV (you know you just uttered those words right!) we might have 40 million - 50 million cars, or 12-15 GW. That's going to take at least 20 years, plenty of time to see how other likely load reductions compensate for this and then add a bit here or there as required.

To work out the power, an easy rule of thumb is to consider a BEV (when there are millions of them to smooth charging loads) as a continuous 300 W load on the grid. Yes, just 300 W per car, I think this rule of thumb is really useful for making the penny drop just how efficient BEVs are compared to what we know and love.

This value is derived from 8000 miles p.a. (today's average) at a nominal 3 miles/kWh (a very conservative estimate for a Leaf/Model 3 etc.), requiring 2667 kWh per annum per car. Divide that by the 8760 hours in the year, and you get 0.3 kW.

In practice journey lengths and annual milages are dropping every year, so it's likely to be less than this, but let's use it though as a round number, multiply it by 20 million and you get 6 GW.

Edited by GT119 on Tuesday 27th October 23:59

[gangzoom]

This thread is still going??

I see the 'Grid will melt' argument against EVs have appeared as usual .

Anyone mention the need for daily non stop driving trips to the Alps in the middle of winter yet??!!

I use my car like a normal person (I've never driven to the Alps non stop, nor plan too). I have charged my EV using Superchargers/Rapid charges ZERO (0) times this year.

Here is my electricity bill last month for charging my EV 100% of the time at home, that includes all my other home electricity usage, hardly grid collapsing figures, infact 13% of the bill is standing charge.



I really am not why this thread is even still going. The OP has a hydrogen fuel cell car that in effect is a paper weight because they cannot refuel it, and hasn't had the same issues with their BEV. Surely that says it all? What is there to actually discuss??

Edited by gangzoom on Wednesday 28th October 06:07

[RemarkLima]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I think it was here:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Edited by Voight Kampff on Wednesday 28th October 00:11

And to that point, yes you could do it in a ICE diesel with 600 mile range and stop once, you could do it in a V8 with a 200 mile range, or you could do it in a BEV. All of those, you could do today, right now, and it'll be OK. Sure, you may need to stop more with a V8 for shorter lengths, or longer with the BEV but it's all within the realm of possible. Those with BEVs are willing to sacrifice some time once or twice a year, to save a ton of time and cost the rest of the year - seems sensible right?

However, it's probably fair to say, you couldn't do that journey, today, with a FCEV. The infrastructure isn't there and isn't likely to catch up quickly. When it's closer, your stops will be determined by the availability of places to fill up, so again you do not have the choice and freedom you seek... yet. And if there's no serious take up, it'll always be that way. If it get taken up, who knows... If you think it's a dead cert then go get shares in the Hydrogen producers and your pension is sorted

[98elise]

gangzoom said:

This thread is still going??

I see the 'Grid will melt' argument against EVs have appeared as usual .

Anyone mention the need for daily non stop driving trips to the Alps in the middle of winter yet??!!

I use my car like a normal person (I've never driven to the Alps non stop, nor plan too). I have charged my EV using Superchargers/Rapid charges ZERO (0) times this year.

Here is my electricity bill last month for charging my EV 100% of the time at home, that includes all my other home electricity usage, hardly grid collapsing figures, infact 13% of the bill is standing charge.

[Img]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50539658257_938186606e_c_d.jpg[/thumb]

I really am not why this thread is even still going. The OP has a hydrogen fuel cell car that in effect is a paper weight because they cannot refuel it, and hasn't had the same issues with their BEV. Surely that says it all? What is there to actually discuss??

Edited by gangzoom on Wednesday 28th October 06:07

Agreed. The vast majority of people don't need to do that 600 mile Alps trip.

Even if they do, it's still possible but needs slightly more planning. We drive to Switzerland (relatives live there) about once every 5 years.

It's 550 miles and 10-11 hours of driving. We stop a couple of times for fuel, food and toilets. With a BEV we might add an extra hour to the entire journey, and that journey can be done now.

[anonymous-user]

RemarkLima said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I think it was here:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Oh man, don't feed them! You're supposed to be one of the sensible ones!
That was a question, not a statement.
This is what I wrote:

Someone has offered an insight into your supercharging figures.
It's more like an hour per car to 'supercharge' a model S to 100% and full range. That's because it's not deemed wise to supercharge to full strength, for risk of battery damage (too much heat, ooooh efficiency loss?), and the remaining 20% of the battery is charged at a much reduced speed . Not the half hour you're pointing at.........

[98elise]

Landcrab_Six said:

98elise said:

Be sure to present your figures to the National Grid, but I think they know what they are talking about.

The National Grid talk a good talk - but the DNOs aren't on the same page, they're really struggling to get all this excess power to where it's needed.

I've done some consulting with people looking to install 50 and 150kW chargers over the last few years - it's very hard to get any reasonable return on investment (you're talking 10-20 years) and some of the quotes I've had to upgrade grid supply have been laughable. As in, I could flatten the site and build a block of apartments for less.

Edited by Landcrab_Six on Tuesday 27th October 23:30

That doesn't mean capacity isn't there, or it can't be done. It's just more expensive than the client wants to pay for a fast charger. The cost of a petrol or hydrogen pump would me magnitudes more.

[anonymous-user]

98elise said:

That doesn't mean capacity isn't there, or it can't be done. It's just more expensive than the client wants to pay for a fast charger. The cost of a petrol or hydrogen pump would me magnitudes more.

Hydrogen - possibly, petrol - no.

Some of the DNO quotes are in the millions.

I think ITM say £2m for an electrolysis install.

Eurogarages can build a big new station for similar, with a dozen pumps and a big Sainsbury's shop.

[Gary C]

eldar said:

98elise said:

National Grid are cool with capacity for BEV's, with a little load control around peak times. They may not be so cool when 3x the energy is needed for your Hydrogen cars!

People will mostly charge at home, work or shops. Basically destination charging. Where you have electricity, you can have chargers.

Hydrogen needs an entirely new infrastructure, and nobody is building it.

Plus, of course, thousands of batteries plugged into the grid is excellent at load balancing. And cheaper than the grid having to provide storage....

National grid are fine with the load. There have been some problems due to generally windfarms being in different places from the traditional coal stations, but developments are removing constraints on the gird.

Its the local distribution that isn't. the local transformers from 11 & 23kv down to 415V three phase (which house then pickup 240 L&N) are generally installed with about 80% used capacity and this 'grid' will need work.

[anonymous-user]

98elise said:

Landcrab_Six said:

98elise said:

Be sure to present your figures to the National Grid, but I think they know what they are talking about.

The National Grid talk a good talk - but the DNOs aren't on the same page, they're really struggling to get all this excess power to where it's needed.

I've done some consulting with people looking to install 50 and 150kW chargers over the last few years - it's very hard to get any reasonable return on investment (you're talking 10-20 years) and some of the quotes I've had to upgrade grid supply have been laughable. As in, I could flatten the site and build a block of apartments for less.

Edited by Landcrab_Six on Tuesday 27th October 23:30

That doesn't mean capacity isn't there, or it can't be done. It's just more expensive than the client wants to pay for a fast charger. The cost of a petrol or hydrogen pump would me magnitudes more.

Landcrab. You'll never get any sense from 98elise.

[jjwilde]

The humiliation of Voight Kampff continues

This is one of the funniest threads in ages, I love how he just keeps digging.

[98elise]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Oh the irony!

[SWoll]

jjwilde said:

The humiliation of Voight Kampff continues

This is one of the funniest threads in ages, I love how he just keeps digging.

I honestly think he might just be bored and has decided having this argument is something to do. Not difficult to find a topic on here that will generate plenty of interest and discussion if you take a contrary view.

[GT119]

Yeah I'm slightly amused that he refuses to engage with me on any of the EV power consumption numbers I've posted, either for the discussion about the importance of weight or the load on the grid.

As an aside I started a thread a while ago stating (somewhat tongue in cheek) that the EV manufacturers have missed a trick by not using Megajoules to define their battery sizes.

Mainly because it just sounds so much more sexy that kWh, and yes I know kWh is how we buy electricity, but it's still very boring and doesn't really mean anything to most people.

If we were using MJ, the metrics are actually quite easy to remember.

A typical 200 mile range EV will have a 200 MJ battery pack, travel 1 mile per MJ, and a MJ costs about 5p to buy.

So for the average 20 mile journey, the cost is 20 MJ or £1 and uses 10% of the battery. Easy peasy!

[phil4]

GT119 said:

As an aside I started a thread a while ago stating (somewhat tongue in cheek) that the EV manufacturers have missed a trick by not using Megajoules to define their battery sizes.

Mainly because it just sounds so much more sexy that kWh, and yes I know kWh is how we buy electricity, but it's still very boring and doesn't really mean anything to most people.

It'd be even better than sounding good. It'd add a level of obfuscation, in the same way that ICE cars are all quoted in miles per gallon, but we buy fuel in litres. Yes it can be worked out, quite easily... but it makes it an extra step, less obvious and thus better for selling.

This sounds like they really did miss a trick, as would have achieved the same.