Hydrogen availability
Discussion
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I've popped rscott's comment in for a little context. I know you find context inconvenient.Rscott wants to compare the number of BEV charging points with the number of FCEV filling points in existence TODAY.
But he knows that BEV has been in the game much longer than FCEV. If he did silly comparisons like that ten years ago he'd be saying the same about BEV vs petrol. He'd be wrong then too.
He also makes the mistake of thinking that FCEV filling point numbers need to somehow match or compete with BEV charging point numbers when in reality the nature of the two modes is very different, which I have explained before. In a 100% FCEV world we might need 150,000 filling points (estimate). In a 100% BEV world we'll likely need close to 3 MILLION public charging points as well as there likely being one in at least 60% of homes too.
So when people say that hydrogen fuel stations cost a lot it's only fair to discuss what EV charging points cost and how much it costs to 'get a power cable to them', especially considering the vast difference in the numbers required and the very different implications of the two types of fuelling points.
Now it appears there are a few people talking about those figures, and surprise-surprise, BEV infrastructure ain't all that easy and it ain't cheap either! Who'd have thunk it?
Still think it's a done deal?
I started out saying (and I've said this a few times now) that there is room for both BEV and FCEV and that the future needs both because each suits our motoring needs in part but neither in full. Neither BEV or FCEV needs to or can rule supreme.
There appears to be a small number of people on here who believe that it's a race, that one must win, that one must be BEV. So it's only fair to ask them how they think BEV will cope with a variety of real life situations or ask them to back that up with some detail. The detail will rarely come but it does open the door for a few guys who are willing to put the figures out there instead.
VK, where did you get 3 million charging station from? That number is at least an order of magnitude too high IMO.
Simply put, if we are consuming 12 GW to charge 40 million cars, each of those charging stations is averaging just 4 kW rate of charge. And that ignores charging elsewhere.
I think you have used too many zeros again....
Simply put, if we are consuming 12 GW to charge 40 million cars, each of those charging stations is averaging just 4 kW rate of charge. And that ignores charging elsewhere.
I think you have used too many zeros again....
GT119 said:
VK, where did you get 3 million charging station from? That number is at least an order of magnitude too high IMO.
Simply put, if we are consuming 12 GW to charge 40 million cars, each of those charging stations is averaging just 4 kW rate of charge. And that ignores charging elsewhere.
I think you have used too many zeros again....
No idea where the 150,000 hydrogen station figure comes from either, given that there are only just over 8,000 petrol stations in the UK Simply put, if we are consuming 12 GW to charge 40 million cars, each of those charging stations is averaging just 4 kW rate of charge. And that ignores charging elsewhere.
I think you have used too many zeros again....
GT119 said:
VK, where did you get 3 million charging station from? That number is at least an order of magnitude too high IMO.
Simply put, if we are consuming 12 GW to charge 40 million cars, each of those charging stations is averaging just 4 kW rate of charge. And that ignores charging elsewhere.
I think you have used too many zeros again....
When have I ever used too many zeros?!!!!!Simply put, if we are consuming 12 GW to charge 40 million cars, each of those charging stations is averaging just 4 kW rate of charge. And that ignores charging elsewhere.
I think you have used too many zeros again....
Coming from someone who uses Musk's figures and doesn't cite him until asked!
I'll have a look for it and link it tomorrow if you don't find it first. It was a document specifically about the future PUBLIC charging points needed in the EU. I think that would include workplace chargers.
I remember mention of 1 point per 10 BEVs.
When I mentioned it first time I did say I estimated it based on a skim read of that article and based on that ratio and my assumption a 100% BEV UK would have 30 million cars.
I did even see mention of a ratio of 1:7 but didn't want to overegg it!
Curiously if you Google it now, Reuters et Al are reporting that some don't feel the BEV charging infrastructure is keeping up, so some of those articles will no doubt point at that report.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Latest stats suggest there are already more EV charging stations (177,000 , most of which can charge multiple vehicles) in Europe than there are filling stations (138,000).That 138,000 is for Europe, not the EU - nearly 20,000 of those are Norway, Switzerland and Turkey, so actual figure is nearer 119,000 in the EU.
rscott said:
GT119 said:
VK, where did you get 3 million charging station from? That number is at least an order of magnitude too high IMO.
Simply put, if we are consuming 12 GW to charge 40 million cars, each of those charging stations is averaging just 4 kW rate of charge. And that ignores charging elsewhere.
I think you have used too many zeros again....
No idea where the 150,000 hydrogen station figure comes from either, given that there are only just over 8,000 petrol stations in the UK Simply put, if we are consuming 12 GW to charge 40 million cars, each of those charging stations is averaging just 4 kW rate of charge. And that ignores charging elsewhere.
I think you have used too many zeros again....
YES 8000 petrol STATIONS/FORECOURTS BUT with maybe ten petrol/diesel PUMPS each on average?
Then I picked a number roughly double that to reflect the possibility that throughput on hydrogen might not be as good as petrol and also to avoid looking like I was undercooking the FCEV figures!
What's your estimate?
ETA also I said filling POINTS, which would be the equivalent of a pump, really.
I think some of the suppliers call the point a station when we tend to call the whole premises a station.
Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 29th October 21:21
anonymous said:
[redacted]
You posted at some point in the last week or so saying 'maybe I used too many zeros', I cannot be bothered to look for it.I made it clear that we should take Musk's numbers with a large pinch of salt and I used other sources to do that, yet you think you win the internet again...
If you don't agree with what I posted then put forward your position and your source.
Regarding your claim, do you or do you not think that 4 kW average power per public charger sounds right, AND that assumes there is NO charging at home or elsewhere.
A simple yes or no would be just fine.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
10 pumps per station? Maybe at some supermarkets and a few major roads. The 4 stations nearest me are 3 - 6 pumps.. the 2013 RAC Fuel Market review puts the national average at just over 7.So maybe 60,000 pumps at the most in the UK.
If that doubles for FCEV, then that's a massive investment in land and construction, plus power networks, if they're producing hydrogen on site.
Government's own advisory body suggests that if everyone with off street parking installs a charging point, then we'll need 214,000 public points...
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/9c...
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Hey steady on!I was only ribbing you about Musk and I don't think that means anything about winning the internet!
I'm not sure I get your point about the 4kW. I do remember the article mentioning breakdown of the power of the points but I don't think it was really from the angle of demand on the grid but more from the perspective of practicality for the BEV drivers.
It wouldn't include home charging points because the ratio would probably be, at the very least, 1.X:10.
I am sorry if I've been rude to you in these past few pages. Be nice to me and I'll be nice to you.
GT119: "You were referring to petrochemical installations in isolation I guess, however the analysis needs to take into account extraction, refining and distribution. "
Sorry, I should have been clearer - I used "petrochem" to cover the whole industry range from extraction through refining to processing plants. My point was that, however much power is consumed in those stages, the vast majority is generated onsite and would not be available for other uses were the facilities to close.
Extraction doesn't use much power, relatively speaking, and is usually supplied by onsite/onboard generators.
Refining uses massive amounts of power and heat which, afaik, is usually supplied by an onsite power station.
It is much the same for large processing complexes but those fall mostly outside this debate as the requirements for their multitude of products will continue.
Distribution is mainly powered by diesel for ships, trucks and locos. Pipeline pumps are the only large electricity consumers that come to mind.
If refineries close, or are dramatically scaled back to just supply the downstream processors, their power plants will close too.
So I don't see that there would be much electric power "released" for BEV consumption.
Sorry, I should have been clearer - I used "petrochem" to cover the whole industry range from extraction through refining to processing plants. My point was that, however much power is consumed in those stages, the vast majority is generated onsite and would not be available for other uses were the facilities to close.
Extraction doesn't use much power, relatively speaking, and is usually supplied by onsite/onboard generators.
Refining uses massive amounts of power and heat which, afaik, is usually supplied by an onsite power station.
It is much the same for large processing complexes but those fall mostly outside this debate as the requirements for their multitude of products will continue.
Distribution is mainly powered by diesel for ships, trucks and locos. Pipeline pumps are the only large electricity consumers that come to mind.
If refineries close, or are dramatically scaled back to just supply the downstream processors, their power plants will close too.
So I don't see that there would be much electric power "released" for BEV consumption.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I don’t get where you have got this 3 million number from. How, with 60% of people doing the vast majority of their charging at home, can you justify needing 20 times as many EV chargers as you think we would need for hydrogen, where no one can fuel at home?3 million is 12 chargers for every mile of road in the UK!?
My experience is similar to others have said in here. In 2 years of EV ownership I’ve used public chargers 4 times. And two of those were just to try it out, I didn’t really need it. So that’s probably about an hour per year.
Mikehig said:
GT119: "You were referring to petrochemical installations in isolation I guess, however the analysis needs to take into account extraction, refining and distribution. "
Sorry, I should have been clearer - I used "petrochem" to cover the whole industry range from extraction through refining to processing plants. My point was that, however much power is consumed in those stages, the vast majority is generated onsite and would not be available for other uses were the facilities to close.
Extraction doesn't use much power, relatively speaking, and is usually supplied by onsite/onboard generators.
Refining uses massive amounts of power and heat which, afaik, is usually supplied by an onsite power station.
It is much the same for large processing complexes but those fall mostly outside this debate as the requirements for their multitude of products will continue.
Distribution is mainly powered by diesel for ships, trucks and locos. Pipeline pumps are the only large electricity consumers that come to mind.
If refineries close, or are dramatically scaled back to just supply the downstream processors, their power plants will close too.
So I don't see that there would be much electric power "released" for BEV consumption.
What fuel are they using for the power plants? If there are modern generating assets that can produce GWs of electrical power and the existing owner can't use them, do you not think it will make commercial sense to redeploy these? Either directly or through change of ownership? Especially if they are fuelled from natural gas.Sorry, I should have been clearer - I used "petrochem" to cover the whole industry range from extraction through refining to processing plants. My point was that, however much power is consumed in those stages, the vast majority is generated onsite and would not be available for other uses were the facilities to close.
Extraction doesn't use much power, relatively speaking, and is usually supplied by onsite/onboard generators.
Refining uses massive amounts of power and heat which, afaik, is usually supplied by an onsite power station.
It is much the same for large processing complexes but those fall mostly outside this debate as the requirements for their multitude of products will continue.
Distribution is mainly powered by diesel for ships, trucks and locos. Pipeline pumps are the only large electricity consumers that come to mind.
If refineries close, or are dramatically scaled back to just supply the downstream processors, their power plants will close too.
So I don't see that there would be much electric power "released" for BEV consumption.
Willow1212 said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I don’t get where you have got this 3 million number from. How, with 60% of people doing the vast majority of their charging at home, can you justify needing 20 times as many EV chargers as you think we would need for hydrogen, where no one can fuel at home?3 million is 12 chargers for every mile of road in the UK!?
My experience is similar to others have said in here. In 2 years of EV ownership I’ve used public chargers 4 times. And two of those were just to try it out, I didn’t really need it. So that’s probably about an hour per year.
I would expect this ratio to increase as BEV population increases, due to improved utilisation.
However, with 30 million BEVs, it is feasible that the number of points in the UK might exceed 1 million.
The question of grid capacity suffers with conflicting reports.
That National Grid interview from February of this year said there is no risk of a shortfall.
However, a few years ago the CEO of the Grid, Steve Halliday (?), gave a retirement speech in which he warned of a fundamental change in the supply of electricity: from "when required" to "when available".
Just recently - on Oct 14th - the Grid warned of very tight supply margins due to lower-than-expected wind output combined with ongoing maintenance outages which was surprising as demand was relatively low at the time, compared to winter peaks.
The crux of the issue is the availability - or not - of sufficient dispatchable power.
Over the past years most of our coal plants have closed along with all of the old Magnox reactors. Plus a number of gas plants have been decommissioned due to adverse market conditions.
In the next few years all of the remaining nukes will close bar one - Sizewell B - and the rest of the coal plants will use up their allotted hours.
Then things will get interesting on cold, still winter evenings. There's lots of conjecture that the later model of smart meters will enable targetted rationing/blackouts and that new heavy consumers like heat pumps, car chargers, etc will also allow remote disconnection.
Those February reassurances are going to be put to the test.
That National Grid interview from February of this year said there is no risk of a shortfall.
However, a few years ago the CEO of the Grid, Steve Halliday (?), gave a retirement speech in which he warned of a fundamental change in the supply of electricity: from "when required" to "when available".
Just recently - on Oct 14th - the Grid warned of very tight supply margins due to lower-than-expected wind output combined with ongoing maintenance outages which was surprising as demand was relatively low at the time, compared to winter peaks.
The crux of the issue is the availability - or not - of sufficient dispatchable power.
Over the past years most of our coal plants have closed along with all of the old Magnox reactors. Plus a number of gas plants have been decommissioned due to adverse market conditions.
In the next few years all of the remaining nukes will close bar one - Sizewell B - and the rest of the coal plants will use up their allotted hours.
Then things will get interesting on cold, still winter evenings. There's lots of conjecture that the later model of smart meters will enable targetted rationing/blackouts and that new heavy consumers like heat pumps, car chargers, etc will also allow remote disconnection.
Those February reassurances are going to be put to the test.
I'm still looking for the link, on and off.
Here's a pointer towards it.
https://www.reuters.com/article/amp/idINKBN27D2AR
One million public chargers across Europe by 2025 for 13 million BEVs estimated to be on the road.
Now I am certain it was 1:10 in the doc I found.
I think it kinda puts into perspective the comments from those few people who seem to think nobody needs them!
Here's a pointer towards it.
https://www.reuters.com/article/amp/idINKBN27D2AR
One million public chargers across Europe by 2025 for 13 million BEVs estimated to be on the road.
Now I am certain it was 1:10 in the doc I found.
I think it kinda puts into perspective the comments from those few people who seem to think nobody needs them!
Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 29th October 23:11
anonymous said:
[redacted]
The 10:1 value refers to all public charging 'points', single-phase, three-phase, slow, fast, ultra-fast, etc.
I believe public includes everything not at home, so workplace, golf club, gym, shopping centres, car parks, etc, etc.
One that basis, millions of 'sockets' doesn't seem unrealistic to me, either from the number of installations or the cost of doing it.
Willow1212 said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I don’t get where you have got this 3 million number from. How, with 60% of people doing the vast majority of their charging at home, can you justify needing 20 times as many EV chargers as you think we would need for hydrogen, where no one can fuel at home?3 million is 12 chargers for every mile of road in the UK!?
My experience is similar to others have said in here. In 2 years of EV ownership I’ve used public chargers 4 times. And two of those were just to try it out, I didn’t really need it. So that’s probably about an hour per year.
Assuming every car was BEV by 2030, why would we need a public charger for every 10-15 vehicles when the majority can charge at home and don't cover significant mileages on anything like a regular basis? It also doesn't account for any improvements in efficiency/battery technology over the next decade that could conceivably mean many owners would only have to charge once or twice a month even if they relied solely on public charging.
Gassing Station | EV and Alternative Fuels | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff