JRP3
Hyperactive Member
It will burn, but it won't add much combustible material to the fire. It won't explode. Once it gets hot enough connections will melt breaking the pack apart and lowering the voltage. My guess anyway.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Hydrogen vs. Battery
- Thread starter siry
- Start date
Umm... I'd have to disagree... at least in the case of Li-ion. Lead-acid and NiMH shouldn't explode. Li-ion will explode if the cells get beyond a critical temperature. (Tesla's design with the cells soaked in coolant should help.) The protocol on aircraft is to soak the heck out of the Li-ion device with a water based fire extinguisher. (So the fire dept. can probably use the same approach.)
(To go to the potential next gen batteries, Li-air cells probably can't be put out with water as pure lithium explodes on contact with water -- may be a potential stumbling block to adoption)
Fire depts. are being trained to deal with accidents and fires with high voltage batteries in cars right now (to prevent electrocutions).
In general, an electric car can be made not to explode without a double or triple fault condition. (to stay fully on topic) I don't think the same can be said for hydrogen...
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
I was talking about the LiFEPO4 lithium chemistry, not Lithium Cobalt which I consider to be inappropriate for most EVs.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Wow, just hit after hit for hydrogen. If I remember correctly Iceland was one of the countries more enthusiastic about hydrogen than others (I remember seen a documentary about their hydrogen buses).
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
If Iceland can't make hydrogen work with all their hydrothermal energy what more do people need to convince them hydrogen just isn't viable?
I'll elaborate when I do the full write-up, but at Frankfurt I saw two interesting things:
1) Conversations about hydrogen seem to (in the main) be grey haired old men talking to grey haired old men. There is another class of conversation which is grey haired old men lecturing the youngsters about why wasserstoff is so much better than batteries, which the youngsters are demonstrating in all the new BEVs.
2) The only manufacturers showing hydrogen that I saw were Mercedes (a strange concept thing with bicycle wheels), Toyota and Mazda (the RX-8). BMW may have had one but I didn't have time to look at every 7 Series on their gigantic stand.
However, GM Opel (can we still say that?) were using their hydrogen SUV thing as a press shuttle. I think this is how they get the column inches - demonstrate the Ampera to the public but sneak around ferrying journalists in the "production ready" H2 stuff.
1) Conversations about hydrogen seem to (in the main) be grey haired old men talking to grey haired old men. There is another class of conversation which is grey haired old men lecturing the youngsters about why wasserstoff is so much better than batteries, which the youngsters are demonstrating in all the new BEVs.
2) The only manufacturers showing hydrogen that I saw were Mercedes (a strange concept thing with bicycle wheels), Toyota and Mazda (the RX-8). BMW may have had one but I didn't have time to look at every 7 Series on their gigantic stand.
However, GM Opel (can we still say that?) were using their hydrogen SUV thing as a press shuttle. I think this is how they get the column inches - demonstrate the Ampera to the public but sneak around ferrying journalists in the "production ready" H2 stuff.
This might be of interest: CARB ZEV Technology Symposium today and tomorrow - Tesla Motors Club Forum
Well, out of curiosity, I emailed to find out which slogan won, and that was it! Congratulations. You are a bad person. ;-)
Actually, that slogan may be horribly corny, but you have to admit that it's catchy. I preferred "Change. It's in the air." because it's both lame and has nothing specifically to do with hydrogen except the image of leaky tanks.
This is a good post over at TTAC:
Research Fund Authorization Heralds Hydrogen’s Return… At Some Point | The Truth About Cars
Includes some vintage James May:
How long ago was this episode? The Hy-wire was introduced in 2002.
Research Fund Authorization Heralds Hydrogen’s Return… At Some Point | The Truth About Cars
Includes some vintage James May:
Last edited by a moderator:
EVs and Energy: Terry Tamminen is "mythtaken"
Paul Scott does a great job of deconstructing Terry Tamminen's recent FUD piece, The Myth of Battery Cars.
Paul Scott does a great job of deconstructing Terry Tamminen's recent FUD piece, The Myth of Battery Cars.
I would add:
Scare materials!? The platinum in Hydrogen cars is one reaseon they are 1M apiece.
He seems to have forgotten the the reason we had California blackouts was a false supply scheme by Enron.
Also, those 250,000 charge stations would probably buy you 5 hydrogen fueling stations. Not a real good use of money.
Scare materials!? The platinum in Hydrogen cars is one reaseon they are 1M apiece.
He seems to have forgotten the the reason we had California blackouts was a false supply scheme by Enron.
Also, those 250,000 charge stations would probably buy you 5 hydrogen fueling stations. Not a real good use of money.
GM Voltage Hosting Webchat with Brian Wynne, President, Electric Drive Transportation
GM Voltage Hosting Webchat with Brian Wynne, President, Electric Drive Transportation Association
I missed this chat, which nevertheless is an interesting read. For example the optimism and continuation of "we are all friends" theme as it relates to hydrogen fuel cells:
Interestingly, they joined hydrogen lobby back in June in petitioning Congress to restore hydrogen fuel cell funding.
GM Voltage Hosting Webchat with Brian Wynne, President, Electric Drive Transportation Association
I missed this chat, which nevertheless is an interesting read. For example the optimism and continuation of "we are all friends" theme as it relates to hydrogen fuel cells:
Interestingly, they joined hydrogen lobby back in June in petitioning Congress to restore hydrogen fuel cell funding.
The GHG presentations of last week's CARB symposium had a similar feel to them. The take home message was (paraphrasing) "there is no silver bullet, we need a variety of fuel solutions to reach carbon emissions goals". There is certainly some validity to that argument. But I hear it more often these days coming from hydrogen advocates trying to stay relevant in the face of plug-in EVs. How much is truth and how much is spin?
Agreed, there are technologies in early stages of development (lithium air batteries, DMFCs) that look attractive and therefore should be getting some R&D funding.
Speaking of GHG presentations, I have the following problems with Dunwoody's chart on page 14 of her presentation:
- The elephant in the room (BEV) is completely ignored.
- Prius tank-to-wheels CO2 emissions are 176 g/mile. Accounting for 83% well-to-tank efficiency for gasoline production/distribution, the well-to-wheel rating for Prius is 212 g/m. That's today; the chart is projecting 250 g/m in 2020. No progress in parallel gas-electric hybrid technology?
- 40 miles of all electric range (plug-in EV) account for reduction of CO2 emissions of only 4% compared to parallel hybrid?
These numbers just don't check out ...
I noticed that during the presentation but wasn't surprised. Dunwoody is from a fuel cell advocacy group and is going to try to put HFCVs in the best light.
More concerning was Ogden's GHG presentation which also seemed to ignore the pure BEV and instead talked about PHEV-10 and PHEV-40, which stand for PHEVs with 10 and 40 miles all electric range (AER), respectively. Dr. Ogden is from a university, so you would hope her analysis would be neutral and unbiased.
If you compare slides 20 and 21 of her presentation, You'll see the PHEV "CO2 emissions per year" lines move based on the assumption used about the cleanliness of the grid. However, the HFCV line does not move. I asked (via proxy) why that line didn't also move, since I expected some hydrogen would be produced through electrolysis. Turns out the analysis assumes that 100% of the hydrogen will be produced from natural gas (since it's more efficient), all the way through 2050! So much for hydrogen being produced from renewables.
Similar threads
