First we got to hear the ICE proponents spreading FUD about Electric Vehicles, now we'll get to hear Electric Vehicle proponents spreading FUD about fuel cells.
Fuel cell vehicles have never made any sense. It's still being turned into electricity anyway, so it's still an electric vehicle. There happens to already be a distribution infrastructure for electricity almost everywhere. The same can't be said for hydrogen.
According to the US Department of Energy, there are eleven public hydrogen stations in the US, almost all in Los Angeles. There are more compressed natural gas stations in my state alone.
They have in the sense that I go to a station and fill up then leave in a reasonable amount of time. I don't have to alter my driving habits from the last 50+ years.
Have you used a vehicle powered by natural gas? I have. For safety reasons, in many places you have to get out of the vehicle while it is being refuelled (the cylinder gets really hot!). And that is a change from your 50+ years driving habit. It also takes longer than a comparable gas pump (even if it is measured in single digit minutes). The gas gauge also reads differently (my guess is due to pressure decreases as gas is consumed).
You can't really expect to radically change tech and have the entire experience be the same.
Not to mention that the only thing preventing one from filling up a tank the way they do with gasoline is battery technology. If they are improved (graphene capacitors?), almost nothing needs to change in the grid.
[EDIT: I am comparing the hydrogen gas stations (which are so rare that might not even exist) to the experience of refilling a compressed natural gas vehicle. It is the closest real world parallel I can think of.]
> Have you used a vehicle powered by natural gas? I have. For safety reasons, in many places you have to get out of the vehicle while it is being refuelled (the cylinder gets really hot!). And that is a change from your 50+ years driving habit. It also takes longer than a comparable gas pump (even if it is measured in single digit minutes). The gas gauge also reads differently (my guess is due to pressure decreases as gas is consumed).
In India, people convert their gasoline based cars to use gas cylinders. The replacement is infrequent and doesn't need to happen as often as much as filling up gasoline.
In Brazil as well, which is where I am coming from.
I did not notice a real decrease in refuelling stops, compared to a gas vehicle. But that is subjective, I haven't measured. That might also be explained by the size of the tanks: most 'converted' vehicles retain their ability to be powered by gasoline by flicking a switch, so the tank cannot be too big and has to go in the trunk.
Almost all conversions are done to decrease costs, most frequently by taxi drivers. As you are required to do annual inspections, it drives up the costs and it is only worth it if you drive long distances in one year.
Doing some quick math, it would cost ~$14 in natural gas (plus some electricity) to fill up a CNG Honda Civic at home. The same car would cost ~$16 to fill up at a CNG station.
Tesla claims that it costs less than $10 for a similar 250 miles of range in the Model S.
By comparison, it would cost at least $27 to fill up a Civic with gasoline to go the same distance.
The only reason for me to get an Electric Vehicle is the green factor. If instead of my car polluting the environment, there is an increase in say coal factories, not sure how that helps the environment. So there is a need for fuel cells.
Electric vehicles are more efficient well to wheel than gas engines, even if powered by coal plants.
Do you want to manage the emissions from one generation source? Or 100K? Also, as the electrical grid becomes more clean, EVs become cleaner. Not so with ICE vehicles.
Actually a study from 2012 shows battery backed EVs getting 34 mpg "on the nation’s dirtiest grid". A good diesel can do much better than that. It isn't so cut and dried as you make it sound.
A diesel vehicle has a service life of at least 200K miles; assuming 12K/miles a year, you're looking at ~16 years of burning petrol.
How much cleaner is the electric grid going to be over the next 16 years as coal plants are shut down due to being unable to meet new emissions guidelines? Electric vehicles future proof the energy required for mobility.
>According to the 2010 California Low Carbon Fuel Standard Final Regulation Order, fuel-cell cars have an average lifetime greenhouse gas emissions rate of 61.83 grams of carbon dioxide per megajoule. This is for hydrogen produced through the popular natural gas reforming process.
Electricity, on the other hand, was determined to have average lifetime greenhouse gas emissions of 41.37g/mj.
Currently fuel cell backed EVs produce ~50% more greenhouse gas emissions than battery backed EVs. If you are going for green factor take the batteries.
You can have on-site production at the gas station though, which you can't currently do with natural gas or petrol, so rolling out pipes may be unnecessary.
> There happens to already be a distribution infrastructure for electricity almost everywhere.
Of course "everywhere" means just the US.
Some people really need to wake up and realise that there are nearly 200 countries in the world. Most of which Toyota sells in and Tesla doesn't. It really isn't appropriate to judge the success of a technology based on the available infrastructure for quite a while yet.
According to the US Department of Energy, there are eleven public hydrogen stations in the US, almost all in Los Angeles. There are more compressed natural gas stations in my state alone.