I agree that Hydrogen may be the future in terms of plant. That's a slightly different issue though to passenger vehicles.
Electric cars.
- Thread starter Polcho
- Start date
Help Support The Homebrew Forum:
.
This is an ongoing argument about hydrogen, my old work we had a hydrogen plant it was run when we knew there would be spikes in the grid or when we had to cycle all 4 generators on the energy had to go somewhere so we ran the plant stored it in tanks that the boats used when required.
In Scotland at least we have an issue, we have a large amount of wind and hydro energy that is generated whenever nature decides, the issue is so great that turbines have to go offline when very windy and the grid cannot accept it.
They are looking to build battery farms but recent fires in battery recycling have lead to massive public backlash and this is now on hold, causing a major issue, Green hydrogen is possible in these circumstances to use the energy that would otherwise not be generated, the kick in the stones is the owners of the turbines are compensated when they are turned off due to lack of income, so we pay to NOT generate energy when in fact we could be making green hydrogen.
As above, there is a case for green hydrogen and I agree, for things like storing in case of a power outage rather than the traditional diesel generators.
But ultimately, it uses electricity to create it. Like ICE, the engines are inefficient and the production of hydrogen is inefficient (unless it's a by-product of some other process, but those other processes aren't going to create enough to power anything major, certainly not the amount we'd need to push vehicles, even lorries around).
The fact that pretty much all the hydrogen stations in the UK and US have now been closed, means we're either 20-30 years off finding a way of doing it (which isn't going to impact my lifetime, even if I'm still about).
The thing about EVs is that despite people moaning about them, they're improving very quickly. As you said, you have a 4 year old model that can't charge that quickly. My year old model can comfortably charge at 140kW.
To put into perspective, the latest CAT battery being put into the Lotus is 110kWh. Many of the latest EVs are able to easily do 4.2kW/mile.
This thing can charge at the latest 350kW (and upcoming 500kW) chargers.
Imagine that! We're talking about being able to charge from 20-80% in around 6 minutes. And the car can do 462 miles to a charge.
The prices are coming down too. I see that Vauxhall are now realistically, if you walk into a showroom, you should be able to buy the EV version of their car cheaper than the diesel. Tesla are continuing to drop their prices. £40k sounds a lot, but they are aiming their vehicles at BMW 3 series drivers. A decent 3 series is getting on for £40k.
not looking to argue but I have to travel 30 miles to get to a working 50kw charger where as i can walk to it being able to get a couple of hours charge would be better than it stuck there for hours or over night
It's an interesting issue, I agree! The ultimate plan is to encourage consumers to consume energy at the best time for the grid with half-hourly pricing which reflects the "expense" of the electricity to produce. Whilst people pay a flat rate of 25p/kWh or whatever, there's no incentive to change habits - why not run the dishwasher, tumble dryer and charge your car at 6pm if it's convenient?
As it is, with 7p/kWh between 23:30 and 05:50, I time-shift all my heavy appliances (along with my car charging) to the small hours, as you probably do, too.
The most efficient power grid is one where generation meets demand and there is no storage, so incentivising people to consume power at the best times is the best method.
Some suppliers, such as Octopus, already publish a "greener days" forecast so that you can plan when in the week to charge your car (if your mileage is low enough that you have a choice). This could also be used for other high consumers; for example, if the weekly forecast show Thursday to be the best day for renewables and thus the cheapest electricity, you might choose that as your laundry day. They bill you less for helping them to balance the grid. It's a win win, really; cheaper prices to the consumer, lower costs for the energy generators and better environmentally.
![BREWING THERMOMETER STICKERS ACCURATELY MONITOR FERMENTING BEER & WINE LIQUID TEMPERATURES 5PCS HOME BREW SPIRITS WINE LCD ADHESIVE [US]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/311DDjo2X3L._SL500_.jpg)
Yes i have a smart charger and it is great.
I agree but if we all start using at off peak it will become peak haha
I'm not looking to argue either
I get your point, but that still doesn't make a 22kW AC charger the right choice to my mind - it makes the installation of more 7kw chargers closer to your address the right choice.
It's impressive how fast the technology is improving, but I'm still confident that 90% of people don't need it - they just think they do.
As above, my Ioniq has a 38kWh battery, charges at best at 48kW on DC and returns up to 5.5miles/kWh in this weather, and a 220 mile journey in 3.5 hours requires a 20 minute break halfway. A larger capacity battery or faster charging would not really improve that journey. And for most of the rest of my driving, I do fewer than 180 miles a day which means I never have to public charge at all.
The problem is that EVs are getting bigger, heavier and less efficient. And that means a bigger battery, which means it gets bigger heavier and less efficient - rinse and repeat.
The problem is storage I went past our wind farm twice last week and four of the 5 turbines were parked I believe storage has been discussed and its on it's way.
Indeed, there’s a lot of FUD until people actually use the technology.
I understand it. I do a few trips a year of around 200 miles each way. A 65kW battery should be able to do 300 miles, but I do worry about the what if of:
- There’s a problem and I need to get a charge
- But all the chargers are being used
- Or I can’t charge at a destination.
It’s unlikely to be a problem that I can’t solve though, much like the idea of me running out of petrol and not being able to refuel at the next services.
I wish there was a way to be able to own a smaller efficient car, but borrow a rangier efficient one, but at the moment the economics don't work out.
Most of the year I could use a car with <100 miles range. The problem though is there's 3-4 trips a year I do that are 210 miles each way.
The cost of renting a car for those few trips would more than outweigh the extra cost of a car with a bigger, heavier battery.
Do what I do then - stop for 20 minutes mid-way on those 210 mile journeys. Plug in, have a wee, get a coffee, stretch your legs, unplug and drive on. I always did the same in my petrol polo with the exception of the plugging in and unplugging
Do what I do then - stop for 20 minutes mid-way on those 210 mile journeys. Plug in, have a wee, get a coffee, stretch your legs, unplug and drive on. I always did the same in my petrol polo with the exception of the plugging in and unplugging
Oh I certainly would, although I was thinking more that I could make do with something like a 22kWh Renault Zoe most of the time, but that would require 3 short stops or 2 longer ones.
A 41kWh might actually work though.
There's a lot of misinformation out there but this very detailed and scientific end to end lifecycle analysis by Volvo of the fully electric XC40 Recharge EV under a range of charging assumptions vs the XC40 ICE shows that the breakeven point for Co2 is much longer than most people realize and under worst case charging assumptions the net difference is much smaller than you may have been led to believe too.
And this is from a company committed to going full EV by 2030.
If you watch the whole video you can see that it is possible to make hydrogen at home cheaply. better if you're not on a water meter. Problem is vested interests. If this avenue had been pursued those with renewables @ home could be driving vehicles that utilise less dirty chemistry from counties with questionable human rights. I don't think this is going to change anytime soon.
Good news about being able to recycle, I'm not sure I'll be around to to see that happen
It's odd that Volvo would pick a totally inefficient brick for their test case. Part of the reason these bricks are so popular is that you can choose an XC40 EV and pay £4 for a full charge on a domestic overnight tariff, so it's cheap to run financially. But in comparison with many other EVs it's horribly inefficient. It weighs over two tonnes and has the aerodynamics of a brick, purely to make a statement of status and wealth about the owner. Because it's so woefully inefficient, it needs an 80kWh battery pack to propel it a best case distance of 205 miles. In contrast, my Ioniq with *less than half* the battery capacity can manage 200 miles.
So I guess it's no surprise that If people choose to buy a a huge status symbol of a vehicle which is 50% as efficient as other EVs with twice the battery capacity (the Ioniq is effectively an 8 year old design now, so it's not like we don't have the knowledge or ability to make efficient, aerodynamic cars), it's going to have a longer environmental payback period.
As consumers we have the ability to consider more than just the "pence-per-mile" running cost when choosing a car but, with the tax incentives and cheap overnight charging, few do.
I wonder if the manufacturers are going to become even more hammered in the next few years, when minimum efficiencies become mandated. I wonder if ULEZ schemes will start to include the worst-offending EVs? I'm still reeling from the fact that you can only expect 2.5miles/kWh from that Volvo. It's a bad day if I see less than 5 miles/kwh and I'd suspect something is broken if I got a journey average of less than 4.5 miles/kwh.
If you make hydrogen at home you're using the same electricity you could use to charge a battery to power a car directly. Actually you're going to use a lot more as by the time you've put it in a car and converted it to motion, it's less than half as efficient. It's the same issue if you mass produce it, plus you add in the energy cost of transporting it, and for every tanker of petrol you'd normally transport you need several hydrogen tankers.
As for dirty chemistry - hydrogen fuel cells also requires lithium and cobalt (although in lesser amounts than current EV batteries), but hydrogen production also requires really rare stuff like Iridium, so you're really just changing one problem for another.
It's worth remembering that part of the reason Hydrogen gets pushed so heavily is because it's the only fuel, with the potential to be green, which can use a proportion of the otherwise defunct distribution system currently in use by the fossil fuel industry.
I'm still amazed at all this nonsense with "we're upgrading the gas mains in your area to make them hydrogen ready". An utter waste; it's never going to happen. May as well pump them full of concrete, or just leave them as ducts for future comms or power cables. When you have electricity already delivered to your house and can have a correctly installed heat pump which will be between 300-400% efficient, why would you want to get that electricity, reduce it to 30% efficiency and then burn it in a device which is, at best 95% efficient?
I'm still amazed at all this nonsense with "we're upgrading the gas mains in your area to make them hydrogen ready". An utter waste; it's never going to happen. May as well pump them full of concrete, or just leave them as ducts for future comms or power cables. When you have electricity already delivered to your house and can have a correctly installed heat pump which will be between 300-400% efficient, why would you want to get that electricity, reduce it to 30% efficiency and then burn it in a device which is, at best 95% efficient?
