Toyota pushes Highlander FCHV-adv to 431 miles on one tank of H2
Toyota Highlander FCHV-adv - click to enlarge
Toyota has covered long distances in its hydrogen fuel cell vehicles before, going from Osaka to Tokyo (347 miles) in a Highlander FCHV in 2007 and also going 2,300 miles (with refueling) from Fiarbanks, Alaska to Vancouver that same year. Now, the improved version of the Highlander FCHV, called the FCHV-adv (hey, it's advanced) was able to cover 431 miles on one 6 kilogram tank on California roads. Well, no. What Toyota is actually announcing is that their field tests have resulted in "an estimated range of 431 miles on a single full tank of compressed hydrogen gas," which is about equal to an average fuel economy of 68.3 miles/kg (approximate mpg equivalent). Toyota representatives and others drove two FCHV-advs from Torrance to San Diego and back, a 331.5 mile trip, and then calculated how much H2 was left in the 10,000 psi tank.
Toyota's Irv Miller said in a statement that Toyota's hydrogen technology is progressing quickly and that TMS plans "to bring to market a reliable and durable fuel cell vehicle with exceptional fuel economy and zero emissions, at an affordable price" in 2015. We've heard recently that this vehicle will not just be affordable, but priced "shockingly low."
See a video of the drive after the jump.
[Source: Toyota]
PRESS RELEASE:
Toyota Fuel Cell Vehicle achieves estimated 431 mile range on a single fueling. (PRNewsFoto/Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc.)
TORRANCE, CA UNITED STATES
FCHV-adv achieves 431 mile estimated range
TORRANCE, Calif., Aug. 6 /PRNewswire/ -- Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. (TMS) announced today the results of a recent collaborative fuel cell hybrid vehicle range and fuel economy field evaluation. The Toyota Highlander Fuel Cell Hybrid Vehicle - Advanced (FCHV-adv) achieved an estimated range of 431 miles on a single full tank of compressed hydrogen gas, and an average fuel economy of 68.3 miles/kg (approximate mpg equivalent) during a day-long trip down the southern California coast.
In mid-2008, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), approached Toyota to participate in a collaborative evaluation of the real world driving range of the FCHV-adv. On Tuesday, June 30, two fuel cell vehicles, two Toyota Technical Center engineers, an SRNL engineer and a NREL engineer completed a 331.5 mile extended round trip drive between Torrance, California and San Diego.
"This evaluation of the FCHV-adv demonstrates not only the rapid advances in fuel cell technology, but also the viability of this technology for the future," said Jared Farnsworth, Toyota Technical Center advanced powertrain engineer.
The drive began at TMS headquarters in Torrance, traveled north to Santa Monica, turned south to San Diego and finally retraced the route back to Torrance. The route encompassed a variety of drive cycles, including high speed highway driving, moderate highway driving and stop and go traffic on surface streets, in an effort to capture a typical commute. Each vehicle was outfitted with a data collection system that captured vehicle speed, distance traveled, hydrogen consumed, hydrogen tank pressure, temperature and internal tank volume.
Driving range data from each vehicle was calculated by SRNL and NREL engineers. The results were averaged for an estimated range of 431 miles, with an average fuel economy of 68.3 miles/kg.
For comparison, the 2009 Toyota Highland Hybrid achieves an EPA-estimated rating of 26 mpg combined fuel economy and has a full-tank range of approximately 450 miles. With premium grade gasoline currently priced at about $3.25, the gasoline-powered V6 Highlander hybrid is estimated to travel approximately 26 miles at a cost of about $3.25. Currently, hydrogen gas pricing is not fixed, but DOE targets future pricing at $2 to $3 per kilogram. Therefore, the FCHV-adv is estimated to travel approximately 68 miles at a projected cost of about $2.50 - more than double the range of the Highlander Hybrid, at equal or lesser cost, while producing zero emissions.
SRNL and NREL analyzed all data gathered during the evaluation and prepared a formal report to DOE verifying range results and miles per kilogram achieved. This report will assist regulators and government research programs to accurately assess the status of the fuel cell industry and viability of the current technology.
"Toyota's hydrogen fuel cell technology has advanced rapidly over the last two years," said Irv Miller, TMS group vice president, environmental and public affairs. "In 2015, our plan is to bring to market a reliable and durable fuel cell vehicle with exceptional fuel economy and zero emissions, at an affordable price."
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
Mark Kiernan 3:08PM (8/06/2009)
I have the horrible feeling that Toyota is getting funding from the oil industry to keep flogging this dead horse called H2. The problem is that if the oil companies basically convert their existing stations to H2 they will be able to fleece us more.
Reply
jake 3:20PM (8/06/2009)
Of course this isn't standard testing, but it's pretty good even for informal testing. Of course, range hasn't been as pressing an issue for hydrogen anyways because of quick refueling (and having more seems to be a question of higher pressure tanks), price is more important. If they can launch one that really is affordable, then maybe hydrogen has a chance, despite having virtually no fueling network (even with California's hydrogen highway, it's basically in the LA area, as you can tell from this trip). This might be able to solve the chicken and egg problem with hydrogen (vehicle first in this case).
Of course Nissan is already launching an affordable EV 2011-2012 so who knows what the plug-in market will be like in 2015. Toyota might have missed an opportunity if they don't develop a serious BEV.
Reply
Tohe 3:29PM (8/06/2009)
Jake,
The price of hydrogen is not in the cost of fuel cell cars, but in the hidden cost of the infrastructure and the hydrogen economy as a whole, the idea is to replace gasoline with hydrogen while their profits stay up. Hydrogen proponents are not in the business of losing money.
As Americans we could live a freer, better life by embracing the electric car, it would be foolish for us to do otherwise.
Tom 4:24PM (8/06/2009)
With Congress replacing the funding the DOE tried to take away from hydrogen powered fuel cell electric vehicles it would appear that the flogged dead horse isn't as dead as its critics would like. And why is it that hydrogen has to be a plot from the oil companies? Where is the evidence of this?
Nozferat 6:14PM (8/06/2009)
TOHE:
And battery companies are in the business of losing money? Listen to yourself....it's retarded.
Tohe 9:45PM (8/06/2009)
Nozferat
.....Just like Fuel Cell companies. On the other hand, a more fair comparison would be that of hydrogen vs. electricity, and as seeing that it is possible go generate electricity for near free (via solar panels or wind) it is reasonable to believe that the BEV would provide its users with greater economical freedom than a hydrogen based option ever would.
polo 10:40PM (8/06/2009)
"With Congress replacing the funding the DOE tried to take away from hydrogen powered fuel cell electric vehicles it would appear that the flogged dead horse isn't as dead as its critics would like."
We all know the hydrogen companies are too small to have that kind of clout....so who do you think was running around D.C. rubbing shoulders? The oil cartel. Without the backing of the Obama admin over the next 8 years..its not gonna happen.
"And why is it that hydrogen has to be a plot from the oil companies? Where is the evidence of this?"
Where does the majority of hydrogen production come from? Steam-treated natural gas. Who owns the leases to those natural gas fields? The oil companies. It doesn't take a genius to figure out why the oil companies are pushing this.
Chris M 11:34PM (8/06/2009)
Tom, it's no conspiracy, the oil companies are quite open about their support for H2 fuel. Most of the H2 fuel promotional groups have oil companies as supporting members, H2 fuel is mentioned prominently on oil company websites as a "future fuel", and Shell Oil even set up a Hydrogen division, with a few Shell H2 stations now in operation! The California Fuel Cell Partnership has both Chevron and Shell as members:
http://www.fuelcellpartnership.org/about-us/members2
http://www.shell.com/home/content/aboutshell/our_business/oil_products/fuels/hydrogen/hydrogen.html
The irony is that some H2 promoters like to pretend that the oil companies are somehow "threatened" by H2, in spite of all the H2 promotional efforts by those oil companies!
Scorch 1:11AM (8/07/2009)
I love all of this talk about the lack of infrastructure for hydrogen fueling stations. Most people on this blog, including one poster above, refers to wind and solar energy as being "near free" and that if we all have battery cars the oil companies will no longer be able to fleece us. The problem with this is assumption is twofold: first, the capacity to generate this much wind and solar capacity doesn't exist yet and will take years if not decades to build. Second, there are no significant transmission lines between where the wind actually blows and where the electricity is needed.
So even with all of the venture capital money pouring into the wind generation market, it still only accounts for 2% of our energy generation. For consumers who do not live in North Dakota or the Texas Panhandle, massive transmission lines still need to be built and the private sector has still not stepped up to build them. Of course, the battery crowd will then say that the government should subsidize their construction. Either way, we will still be paying for it and 10 years from now the same people will be ranting about how the wind energy cartels are screwing them.
All this talk about infrastructure is not as cut and dried as some people make it seem. It's not that easy to get the government to build expensive power lines to your wind farm, just ask Boone Pickens.
Tohe 2:49AM (8/07/2009)
@Scorch
You make a valid point, not everyone will take advantage of their freedom to invest and choose how to power their BEVs. But my point is that the technology to freely power your BEV is free, versatile and available to all those who wish to make use of it.
Nozferat 3:46AM (8/07/2009)
TOHE:
That may be true NOW...but that doesn't mean it'll always be true.
Everyone has a stake in this...not just the oil companies. When proponents of EV's and batteries stop acting like they are doing this for the greater good rather than their own self interests, then it'll be a fair playing ground. Until then, pretending otherwise is just BS.
Dave B 3:30PM (8/06/2009)
DOE "targets" future prices at $2 to $3 per kg?????
Is that the same department that estimates future gasoline prices at $2.50 in 2015?
Here's the real question.....
Does anyone know what the price is for 1kg of hydrogen today?
Reply
jake 3:45PM (8/06/2009)
The target is that, but if the remember correctly the estimate right now is with current technology (distributed natural gas production), the fuel will cost about $5 per kg. I don't know what method they will use to bring it down to the $3 target for set for 2009. Perhaps it is because they haven't hit the targets that they had their funding cut.
Dave B 4:37PM (8/06/2009)
Even at $5 per kg, 431 miles is not bad from an economic standpoint.
$30 to fill up the tank and go 431 miles exceeds what most of today's vehicles are capable of.
Considering not a single drop of the hydrogen is from foreign sources and there are zero emissions, this is pretty impressive.
Now let's get cracking, and build that infrastructure!!!
Nozferat 6:15PM (8/06/2009)
What people don't see is the huge hidden cost of gasoline....wars, military, shipping, more waste, more pollution...it doesn't end.
paulwesterberg 3:46PM (8/06/2009)
68.3 miles/kg sounds pretty good because:
1 kg of hydrogen has the same energy content as
1 gallon (3.2 kg) of gasoline.
But when you find out that 1 kg of hydrogen costs $13*
Today the current price per gallon of gasoline is 2.61 per gallon, so $13 would buy you 4.98 gallons.
So to drive 68.3 miles on $13 is like driving a car that gets 14 miles per gallon.
*Hydrogen advocates will say that it is much cheaper than this, but this is the only actual price I have ever seen listed for compressed hydrogen actually for sale at a gas station.
Even if hydrogen only cost $8 per kg that is still the gas equivalent of 23mpg.
Reply
jake 5:02PM (8/06/2009)
Wow, $13 is quite shocking. They project $5 with volume production but $13 seems quite far out from $5. I wonder if it is possible to find a picture online of the listed price.
Rain 5:43PM (8/06/2009)
Sorry,Paul.
The current price per kg or gallon is $4.99 in Irvine Ca.
The $14 per gallon was just so much TPM agit-prop from the Petro-Chem corps,Who wish to not have to compete with H2 vehicles and were realizing record profits in the time frame of $150 a barrel of Oil and 45 billion per quarter windfall.
Unfortunately those same profits buy volume lip service in the mass market media.
here's the source:
http://www.hydrogencarsnow.com/hydrogen-filling-station-irvine-ca.htm
meme 7:51PM (8/06/2009)
The price of hydrogen strongly depends on the source. Electrolysis H2 is far more expensive than petrochemical H2.
Also -- point of note -- you can fuel people a lot cheaper when you don't have to pay for your station because it was built by government grants.
Lastly, while we're talking about the Irvine station: it's had huge compressor reliability problems, the tank is a scary looking behemouth, can only fuel 10 vehicles a day, and it takes several dozen minutes to fill most of the longer-range H2 vehicles.
kballs 1:29AM (8/07/2009)
That is pretty good efficiency, but could be at at least 30% better as BEV.
Have you seen the hydrogen tanks on the Highlander? A production version would cut the range by at least half because they can't include the 2 tanks out back.
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/39125/113/
DO NOT get rear ended in that thing. Gasoline cars have the same explosive issues, but that is also why cars put the tank ahead of the rear axle (usually under the rear seats, sometimes under the front seats).