Competing technologies to BEV

[kenliles]

Thanks kenliles.

I find it difficult to believe that Toyota's distinguished engineers are ignorant regarding hydrogen risks. Therefore it is likely that Toyota chose to back the horse that is certain to lose.

many likely do Auzie; but not the decision makers necessarily. This is endemic of these companies- making the wrong decisions for the wrong reasons and exactly why Elon has been forced to compete instead of alter the current industry. Honda's been working Fuel Cell for more than a decade now with some limited test cars in CA. If they keep pouring money into it, some of the problems will be addressed and resolved in the next 10 years, only to reveal new ones; It'll eventually die under it's own weight or at best be adapted for some specialized uses- It does have merit for very limited controlled applications- about the furthest from consumer cars as you can think of!

c041v - thanks for that disclaimer suggestion; I should probably do that (ggr has a good one - maybe I should steal his! )-

 

[Julian Cox]

6000+ words on the subject sent to the California Energy Commission

But still it is a very valid question to ask WHY DO THEY BELIEVE THIS? They really should be able to read current technology are where we are headed in the next few years.

Well I have been promising to answer that one for a while so here it is.

(warning, very long but I trust fascinating blog entry sadly messed up the formatting with no button I can see to fix it).

If you need proof of hoax seek comfy chair:


Tesla Motors Club - Enthusiasts & Owners Forum

 

[ecarfan]

Julian that link goes to an "invalid page" at TMC.
Tesla Motors Club - Enthusiasts & Owners Forum

 

[Julian Cox]

Julian that link goes to an "invalid page" at TMC.
Tesla Motors Club - Enthusiasts & Owners Forum

Hmm - I clicked on the link and it went straight there, try again.. (otherwise on click on me and look at my blog entries)

Tesla Motors Club - Enthusiasts & Owners Forum


Thanks!

 

[MikeC]

Neither method works for me, Julian. It may not be up yet, maybe a moderator needs to approve?

 

[renim]

But the logic is inescapable in this case too; you still can't get less CO2 emissions, nor can you get more energy, than by just burning the coal.

even that is subjective, gasification of coal is one technique used in very high efficiency coal power plants, (but thats a separate issue)
but even if that is not generally the case, its not the issue, people use gaseous fuel because it is both more convenient and cleaner at combustion. It may be cheaper to use a coal cooking top, but its much nicer to use a gas cooking top. Same with small power plants.

The neat thing about H2 for fuel cells in places like Beijing is that the town gas is from coal, so it is piped as H2 and CO. Therefore, at the H2 vehicle station, it is just a filtering operation to extract a H2 stream (not a reformation operation) This is presumably achieved via H2's legendary permiability properties (ie absorbtion into magnesium etc). This would be much more competitive than using natural gas, nearly the same cost as having a preexisting H2 pipe.

but there are some many other issues that make HFC non competitive, that its mostly a moot point.

 

[Julian Cox]

Letter to the Calif. Energy Comm. Comprehensive Debunk of FCVs ( V LONG)

For the sake of version control, the complete study on the subject now posted here as a blog post:


http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/entry.php/164-Comprehensive-Dismissal-of-Fuel-Cell-Environmental-Claims-Open-Letter-to-CEC

 

[MikeC]

Part 2...

 

[Julian Cox]

For the sake of version control, the complete study on the subject now posted here as a blog post:


http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/entry.php/164-Comprehensive-Dismissal-of-Fuel-Cell-Environmental-Claims-Open-Letter-to-CEC

 

[xhawk101]

Fantastic work Julian!

 

[Cosmacelf]

As to why Toyota is charging ahead with fuel cells, I can think of many reasons. They have a dominant position in small battery hybrids (Prius) and thus a lot of internal political pressure to defend that technology. A compelling BEV would detract from Prius sales. Toyota also has a lot of engineers and technology in ICE engines and thus lots of internal political pressure to use that technology. Toyota is also playing the California CARB game - they will get a lot of credits for each fuel cell car sold, better to sell cars at a loss than to pay Tesla for CARB credits.

None of this is very surprising. If you look at the computer landscape over the past 30 years, it is a constant cycle of new startups eating the old guard's lunch. There is no reason the same thing can't happen with cars...

 

[dennis]

None of this is very surprising. If you look at the computer landscape over the past 30 years, it is a constant cycle of new startups eating the old guard's lunch. There is no reason the same thing can't happen with cars...

Yes, but it takes a LOT more capital, time and perseverance to prevail here since the ICE/Fossil fuel industry is much larger than the computer industry.

 

[Dan5]

As to why Toyota is charging ahead with fuel cells, I can think of many reasons. They have a dominant position in small battery hybrids (Prius) and thus a lot of internal political pressure to defend that technology. A compelling BEV would detract from Prius sales. Toyota also has a lot of engineers and technology in ICE engines and thus lots of internal political pressure to use that technology. Toyota is also playing the California CARB game - they will get a lot of credits for each fuel cell car sold, better to sell cars at a loss than to pay Tesla for CARB credits.

None of this is very surprising. If you look at the computer landscape over the past 30 years, it is a constant cycle of new startups eating the old guard's lunch. There is no reason the same thing can't happen with cars...

To put in bluntly Toyota got really, really lucky at least in the US when it came to the Prius. If you look at the "jumps" in gas prices, 2005 and 2007 the Prius also started to take off. Had gasoline prices stayed at 2004 levels the Prius would be a footnote in automotive history.

Toyota, at least the management, does not recognize that they got lucky and believe they can "catch lightning" twice. It does not work that way. I'm reminded of Kid's in the Hall- Stummies

Also with the hydrogen, they are doubling down. like a hand of balckjack, you have and Ace and a 4, and the dealer has a 6 showing. You hope the gamble pays off.

 

[Auzie]

Also with the hydrogen, they are doubling down. like a hand of balckjack, you have and Ace and a 4, and the dealer has a 6 showing. You hope the gamble pays off.

I would be surprised if the gamble does not pay off for current Toyota executive team. The gentlemen on the Toyota board are highly unlikely to be misinformed, misguided or ignorant.

This gamble may not pay off for Toyota business in a very long term.

There is likely to be agency problem at Toyota (misalignment between the executive compensation and the long term business interests). The agency problem is quite common.

 

[Johan]

@Julian Cox: I applaud your work! It will be very exciting to see what the response from the committee will be, if any, and if the grant is finally approved or not. Dr. Brown has been exposed in the open now and if there was ever a blatant example of conflict of interest this would be it.

 

[Julian Cox]

@Julian Cox: I applaud your work! It will be very exciting to see what the response from the committee will be, if any, and if the grant is finally approved or not. Dr. Brown has been exposed in the open now and if there was ever a blatant example of conflict of interest this would be it.

Johan, that is most Kind -

The cover note that went with this letter:


As a follow on to my previous brief description of issues surrounding PON-13-607, kindly see attached document which is vital to be read and understood by decision makers dealing with Hydrogen funding in California.


I also expect the public has a right to a clear understanding of emissions reduction benefits prior incurring expenses in the order of $200 million in Hydrogen Infrastructure hence the attached is an open letter.

In regards to levelling with the public, consumer protection and policy considerations I would respectfully submit that this issue carries with it an especially profound duty of care.


Proponents of FCVs with large financial resources of their own have made it plain that they intend to challenge sales of Electric Vehicles with Hydrogen Fuel Cell technology claiming the combination of equivalent environmental credentials with added consumer convenience in terms of range and filling times (and can be expected to be artificially priced to sell regardless of losses taken per vehicle or unit of fuel). The decision before the commission therefore is whether or not to provide substantial public funds to lower the draw-bridge to a full-scale assault from Big Oil and Big Auto in the California’s green energy and transportation sector.

At risk is not simply that of relieving large auto makers of the obligation to pursue non-fossil-fuel zero emission Electric Vehicles but that funding PON-13-607 and similar initiatives may adversely affect California’s largest Automotive employer and the arguably the defining success case of California’s ZEV program to date. Namely Tesla Motors Inc.

That said, the decision whether or not to fund PON-13-607 is not so much a decision about the merits of and the risks facing one company. It is a landmark decision on the future of energy and/orthe environment depending entirely on the validity or otherwise of the claims to environmental benefits made by lobbyists on behalf of the auto and fossil fuel industries concerning Hydrogen FCVs. These claims are not simply questionable they are profoundly false as demonstrated in the attachment.

As is clearly stated in bold on the Toyota website “we are setting the next 100 years in motion”, no doubt a reference to estimated reserves of natural gas. Besides the fact that US energy and environmental policy is not strictly for the Japanese auto industry to decide despite embedding itself in every lobby group and by all appearances to date on this issue. According to the data that is driving environmental policy, we do not have another 100 years of atmospheric CO2 capacity available to pursue such a policy.

I trust therefore that the Japanese can make do with a respectful apology for Hiroshima and Nagasaki and that the Commission will see fit to send a clear message that revenge will just have to wait.

 

[Tasmanian Devil]

What is really going on in the heads of Teslas competition...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKFZ4DyxMww

...

 

[AustinPowers]

I think you hit the nail on the head Julian, excellent analysis. We are all too familiar with how Big Oil and Big Auto works, and they never work for anything else other than their own interest.

Coming from a country without "Big Oil", I only know our Auto companies. And when I read Julian's analysis or the discussion in this thread in general, there are some points I just have to disagree with - or at least points that I just don't get.

First, this so-called "cannibalization". What's that supposed to be all about?
Imagine the following future scenario: BMW offers a great 3-series EV, they also offer standard 3-series gas and diesel engines at the same time. I would image that pricing would be such that BMW doesn't lose money on any of those offerings.
Why on Earth then would BMW care whether a customer bought an EV 3-series vs. a gas or diesel 3-series? As long as the customer is buying a BMW, and not a C-class, A4 or whatever the competition offers, I am certain BMW would be happy.

Then there is the whole "threat" idea I just don't understand.
Think for a minute. Tesla is selling what, say 50K vehicles a year (at the very best) at the moment, realistically far less?
VW, BMW, Audi, Merc, Toyota etc. are selling hundreds of thousands, no millions of cars a year. So - at least at the moment - Tesla is no "threat" to them in any way - nor will it be even if Gen III sells 200K vehicles a year.
It's the same situation the other way round. Even if VW succeeds in selling 100K e-Golf and e-up! vehicles, that wouldn't be a "threat" to Tesla, as those cars are no competition for Tesla. No one can tell me that someone in the BEV market is deciding between a 100K Euro Model S and a 40K Euro e-Golf for example.

And what is so bad about PHEV's as a transition medium? A lot of people (I would dare say the majority of the current car buying public) just wouldn't dream of buying a BEV at the moment (range anxiety, too expensive, unproven technology, all kinds of other misgivings, whether subjective or true - no matter). But PHEV cars imho can make transition easier for a lot of people. Overall range is basically the same as any gas or diesel car, yet you get (at least for shorter distances like the average daily commute) the EV benefits like great acceleration, quiet cabin, ease of use etc.
So almost "subconsciously" the average driver can experience what is great about EVs without giving up the "feel" of a conventional ICE. I am sure that someone who experiences a PHEV now will be very susceptible to buying a BEV in a few years time when battery technology has evolved even further.

Just my two cents.

 

[AustinPowers]

I think its is a fair deduction that the only purpose of FCVs is to try to extinguish the market for renewables and sustainable transportation. It cannot stand on its own feet economically but that is not preventing $billions being poured into it in terms of vehicle programs, marketing and lobbying. While the focus of the attacks are definitely on anti Tesla touch points, the immediate effect is to divert energies within Big Auto from EV to FCV.

Hmm, am I the only one who is not into this type of conspiracy theory stuff?
I mean really, current FCVs are nothing more than overly expensive test-beds that realistically will never hit the market in any significant form. At least not until hydrogen can be produced by using excess energy from e.g. wind turbines at times when they produce more energy than is needed.
Anti Tesla campain by "Big Auto" promoting FCV's??? Come on, do you (and by "you" I don't mean you Julian in particular, but everyone who makes remarks in such a direction) really, honestly believe that?

When I look at current developments in alternative energy cars, what do I see? BMW offers the BMW-i models. VW offers the e-up! und more importantly the e-Golf. Ford has the Focus electric, Renault has its Z.E. models, most notably the Zoe, and Mercedes is about to launch the electric B-Class. Add to that the models that have been on the market for quite some time, like the Leaf, the i-Miev, Smart electric, etc., and you arrive at quite a selection of attractive BEVs from a lot of carmakers. And more models are on the horizon.
I can't see any FCV on the market, at least none that you can actually buy. And who would, I mean for example here in Germany there are four (yes, as in 4) hydrogen stations in the whole country (vs. thousands of public chargers!). So where is this "big" masterplan to destroy Tesla by promoting FCV's???

 

[Johan]

Hmm, am I the only one who is not into this type of conspiracy theory stuff?
I mean really, current FCVs are nothing more than overly expensive test-beds that realistically will never hit the market in any significant form. At least not until hydrogen can be produced by using excess energy from e.g. wind turbines at times when they produce more energy than is needed.
Anti Tesla campain by "Big Auto" promoting FCV's??? Come on, do you (and by "you" I don't mean you Julian in particular, but everyone who makes remarks in such a direction) really, honestly believe that?

When I look at current developments in alternative energy cars, what do I see? BMW offers the BMW-i models. VW offers the e-up! und more importantly the e-Golf. Ford has the Focus electric, Renault has its Z.E. models, most notably the Zoe, and Mercedes is about to launch the electric B-Class. Add to that the models that have been on the market for quite some time, like the Leaf, the i-Miev, Smart electric, etc., and you arrive at quite a selection of attractive BEVs from a lot of carmakers. And more models are on the horizon.
I can't see any FCV on the market, at least none that you can actually buy. And who would, I mean for example here in Germany there are four (yes, as in 4) hydrogen stations in the whole country (vs. thousands of public chargers!). So where is this "big" masterplan to destroy Tesla by promoting FCV's???

While I agree that up until now there haven't been FCVs available you can see that in some places they are trying to lay the ground work, such as this application in California for funding for infrastructure. This kind of thing is best to "nip in the cradle" so to speak.