Hydrogen vs. Battery

[richkae]

So true!


Meanwhile gasoline kills so many people that it doesn't even make the national news. There are many, many reasons why fuel cells are a bad idea, including, but not limited to the short life of fuel cells, the inefficiency of H2 production, and the fact that it's cheaper to burn H2 in an ICE than in a million-dollar fuel cell. But as far as safety, I'm inclined to think that H2 is probably safer than gasoline. It requires just the right fuel:air mixture to burn, and when it leaks it goes up and away, unlike gasoline, which sits on the ground and burns until it's gone, or soaks into your clothing and burns you to a crisp.

Unfortunately hydrogen is stored under such pressure that the container itself is a bomb - regardless of whether the hydrogen ignites.

[Doug_G]

But as far as safety, I'm inclined to think that H2 is probably safer than gasoline. It requires just the right fuel:air mixture to burn, and when it leaks it goes up and away, unlike gasoline, which sits on the ground and burns until it's gone, or soaks into your clothing and burns you to a crisp.

Hydrogen is much more of an explosion danger than gasoline - spectacularly so. Gasoline vapors are explosive in 1.4% to 7.6% concentrations, while hydrogen is explosive in concentrations of 4–74%. In other words, almost any concentration of hydrogen is explosive. Hydrogen is essentially the most dangerous gas in existence in terms of how easy it is to trigger an explosion.

[dpeilow]

Bought and paid for: Chu sees benefits of hydrogen fuel cells | Aiken Standard

[doug]

Bought and paid for: Chu sees benefits of hydrogen fuel cells | Aiken Standard

They're just trying to boost their industry. Chu didn't actually say much, but they're making a big deal about the little he did say. So far he hasn't let them have much cash.

[dpeilow]

It's an election year.

[doug]

Hydrogen Fuel-Cell Cars Still Important, Automakers Say

In Germany, Federal and state funding to build a network of hundreds of hydrogen fueling stations now totals in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

But the current political climate makes that kind of funding seems highly unlikely in the U.S. And Jerram notes that Toyota, Honda, and Daimler representatives at the conference "were unanimous that they should not have to foot the bill for infrastructure build-out."

[dpeilow]

OK then - let the private sector build out a hydrogen network...

[rabar10]

Elon's take on the Hydrogen vs. Battery discussion came up in the Q&A of the recent Fireside Chat with Elon Musk.

The question is asked at 0:53:47 in the YouTube video of the event. Here's a quick transcription:

Honda, Mercedes have both said that they clearly feel that hydrogen fuel cells are the the future [Elon scoffs], but I believe strongly in batteries (I know!). Why do you think that they are so committed to hydrogen as the next step, whereas batteries, I really feel like we could make this happen?

I don't really know, because the math is so super-obviously in favor of batteries, that it's like staring facts in the face and saying they're not true.

If you take the best-case scenario for a fuel cell -- assume it's fully optimized, so you envelope it from a physics standpoint, and give it the best-case situation -- how does that compare to state-of-the-art lithium-ion, or current lithium-ion in production? It loses.

So it's like, success is not one of the possible outcomes, why embark upon that? It's crazy.

I think they felt for a long time that there was this need to be doing -something-, and since fuel cells were 10 years in the future and always would be, then they could always say that they were working on fuel cells, and that would satisfy people.

Tesla called it "fool sells".

[brianman]

Both this and the Fisker design comment -- I'd love to hear an honest attempt at a rebuttal.

[W.Petefish]

"Fool Cells"

HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!