An H2 FCEV Fit will probably cost $660,000 and have a range of 200 mi within the radius of the couple of cities with H2 fueling stations. Any takers?
Of course Honda could sell those for a much greater loss for the privilege of cramming an inefficient transportation system down our throats.

↓↑report

Wow, I'll take that crystal ball you're using. What part of California do you live in? I'll take your $2.5 gallon any day. Prices here range from $3.1-3.3.

↓↑report

Oh, yes, the horrors. For instance, look at the abysmal Prius sales numbers with these low gas prices..

↓↑report

Obviously fuel cells are not a long term solution. We are running out of fossil fuels and its too expensive to make hydrogen from electricity, then compress it, then store it, then decompress it, then run it through a fuel cell to turn it back into electricity.

In 20 years the battery in the Tesla will cost 19% of what it does today (19% of $25,000 is $4,750 which is $90/KWh) due to the steady 8% a year drop in battery prices. It will also weigh a fraction of what it does today (though that is not as predictable as cost). Even if hydrogen fuel cells are just as cheap (a big if) and last just as long (another big if) they will still cost much more to fuel because their inefficienies are inherent.

The only question remaining is whether or not hydrogen fuel cells are a good short term solution and if we want to spend billions on an infostructure that will be antiquated before it is finished.

↓↑report

Letstakewalk, at least provides cherry-picked quotes and factoids. Your statement, which contradicts all known evidence, amounts to not much more than fluff.

↓↑report

I'm not exaggerating.

BEVs really are that ridiculous.

And GM, Toyota, Daimler, Honda, Ford, etc. all agree that "all of the evidence" supports fuel cells over BEVs.

Its really quite obvious if you look at the price of batteries. 10 grams of platinum will be quite a lot cheaper than 2500 lbs of batteries and the chassis upgrades to support them.

↓↑report

Here is the evidence:

http://green.autoblog.com/2009/08/17/honey-i-shrunk-the-fuel-cell-next-gen-gm-hydrogen-stack-gets-s/

↓↑report

Er Dave ,
Just converted an audi using Lithium Cells , Pack weight
runs in at around 300lbs, range is around 65 miles , cost of pack around
8k dollars . Hardly in fuel cell territory as far as cost and weight goes !

Are you sure your names not Glen ?

↓↑report

Dave as someone who is open to fuel cells and thinks that the BEV focus overlooks some hard facts, I have to say that you have broken some of the rules here at autobloggreen. Let me educate you so you don't make a fool out of yourself ;-)

Here at the blog we assume that fuel cells will never become cost effective because they won't benefit from mass production. We assume that the cost of limited run prototypes will be the final cost. Batteries are given the benefits of economy of scale because they are morally righteous.

We ignore the fact that batteries have performance issues in cold environments because we all live in southern California where 60 degree weather is considered "freezing". We assume that the rest of the world has winters like ours instead of winters like those found in Germany and Japan.

We overlook any long term battery degradation due to deep discharge cycles because nobody is going to drive their BEV more than twenty miles a day.

We assume that you can make a high capacity BEV big rig because it sounds cool. We all know that long haul trucking and delivery is amiable to driving at most 150 miles a day and spending 8 hours recharging.

We assume that people are cool with buying a car and leasing the battery because hey- how could that be confusing?

We assume that when a 4,000 psi hydrogen tank is ruptured that the hydrogen makes a direct path to your head where it ignites your hair and you turn into Michael Jackson.



Anyhow hope this helps you to fit in better here. And for the BEV fanbois, no I am not a fuel cell fanboi. I do however find the BEV fixation to be a bit ignorant in light of the fact that they aren't the ideal solution that people parrot them to be. FCV's have issues as well, I suppose that I'll make a list of those when somebody goes off the deep end and maybe one day we can all have a rational discussion about this.

↓↑report

Dave/letstalkawalk, that link you posted does not even REMOTELY show that a FCV with a life-time hydrogen included would be cheaper than a BEV. It only says they made a smaller stack, that should theoretically be cheaper to produce. Well, $400K or even $200K is definitely cheaper than $700K, but still impractical for cars.

We might get some fuel cell BUSES out of it, but again, there still isn't a BEV on the road or in planned production that would cost as much as the cheapest FCV.

augustus, I guess you forgot about the part where all the fuel cells out have a life expectancy of under 5 years. Even the million-dollar Honda Clarity will conk-out in around 5 years. Batteries are still cheaper, last significantly longer, are more reliable, and less lethal in an accident.

↓↑report

@augustus
Lets look at your points one at a time:

1) fuel cells price will come down with mass production
This is your second most valid point. When comparing fuel cells to batteries BEV suporters often compare the present day costs of both which is not quite fair because batteries benifit from economies of scale and fuel cells do not. Of coures fuel cell prices will drop over time and we can assume, much faster than batteries, but even if battery prices only drop in half while fuel cell prices drop by a factor of a hundred, fuel cells would not be the clear winner.

2) "We ignore the fact that batteries have performance issues in cold environments"
We ignor that "fact" because it isn't true. While you can find a battery chemestry that has problems in the cold, many of the leading chemistries do not. Many batteries tend to run hot and do better in the cold.

3) batteries degrade over time
While batteries do degrade over time, just ablout any chemestry will outlast a hydrogen fuel cell. This is mainly a problem with smaller batteries because there is more strain per cell, which is why the volt will only use half of the batteries full capacity when the roadster uses 80% or 95% depending on the mode. Quick charging adds additional wear, but each time you duble the number of cells, you can charge twice as fast with the same amount of wear. No one said batteries were perfect, they are just better.

4) long haul BEV trucks would require a lot of batteries
This is your most vaild point. My answer to it is not batteries, but trains. Long haul trucks don't make sense to begin with. Still if for some reason we are unable to lay down track, then hydrogen could compete with BEVs and posibly even win.

5) "We assume that people are cool with buying a car and leasing the battery because hey- how could that be confusing?"
No we don't. You aparently didn't read the comments on any article about battery leasing where many BEV suports say its a bad idea. So other than being factualy inacureate you brought up a non-issue. If people would rather buy than lease, then maybe they will buy instead of lease.

6) "We assume that when a 4,000 psi hydrogen tank is ruptured that the hydrogen makes a direct path to your head where it ignites your hair and you turn into Michael Jackson."
Toyota is using a 10,000 psi tank in its HFCV http://green.autoblog.com/2007/09/28/toyota-fchv-goes-from-osaka-to-tokyo-on-one-tank-of-h2/
and yes if that car crashes the tank might just rupture which would be dangerous enough if it were not filled with a gas that is explosive when combined with air (lets just hope that there are not sparks in that first exposion). Any idiot can see that a 10,000psi tank full of hydrgen is more dangerous that a tank full of gasoline (which is more dangerous than a battery).

I do like batteries. You can call me a fanboy, but I would take you a lot more seriously if you did so without a not-so-sublte distain for reality.

↓↑report

Dave, your statement was sheer nonsense, and the link you referenced doesn't support your contention. Automotive H2 storage alone costs more than an EV battery pack, after all, 10,000 psi carbon fiber wound H2 tanks aren't cheap. Ironically, the H2FC researchers chose carbon fiber high pressure tanks as their "cheapest" H2 storage option - large vacuum insulated liquid H2 flasks cost more, and metal hydride storage is far more expensive and a lot heavier.

10 grams of platinum might cost less than 2,500 lbs. of batteries, but I must point out that (1) the latest GM fuel cell requires 30 grams, they haven't yet reached the 10 gram goal, and (2) Nobody has seriously proposed an EV with "2,500 lbs." of batteries. Even the longer range 300 mile or more BEVs have less than half that battery weight. Please don't forget the other components needed for the fuel cell, they also add to the cost.

Augustus, your attempts at satire might be more successful if they had some facts behind it. Yes, mass production can reduce costs, but it cannot reduce costs below the cost of the materials needed, and they can't begin mass production until the price is low enough to support mass marketing.

Battery power output does decrease when cold, but a fuel cell is even less cold tolerant - a LiIon battery is still functional at -30 F (-24 C) but a fuel cell doesn't function at all when it is below freezing. H2 fuel cell cars need batteries to run things until the fuel cell can be warmed to operating temperatures, especially in cold climates.

A well designed EV avoids excessive battery discharge and overcharging with battery managment to maximize battery lifespan. Very few EVs would be "deep discharged" by a "more than 20 mile trip", range is usually much better than that even for NEVs.

There are BEV "big rigs" and other BEV trucks designed for local use, not long hawl. On the other hand, there aren't any H2FC trucks of any kind for long haul use, either. Nope, when they had that "H2 road trip" they had to haul the refueling facilities on diesel trucks, and haul all their H2 cars back on diesel flatbeds. Similar EV road trips didn't need diesel assistance.

↓↑report

I wish BEVs were viable. Theyre not.

Stop living in a dream world, people.

↓↑report