Irish Times – Plan for 80 Hydrogen Fuel Stations for Ireland by 2030


Irish Times FC image

Royal Dutch Shell’s first UK hydrogen refuelling station. Hydrogen’s big advantage, as a fuel, is that it’s quick and easy to use by a driver. File photograph: Chris Ratcliffe/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Currently only two hydrogen-fuelled Model cars available and neither is sold in Ireland

Plans for the introduction of a hydrogen fueling infrastructure for Ireland are accelerating, and a group representing those interested in using hydrogen as a fuel source is projecting that there will be 80 hydrogen filling stations by 2030.

Hydrogen Mobility Ireland is made up of industrial and governmental representatives, and includes, among others, BOC Gases, Bord Gáis EnergyToyota Ireland, CIÉ Group, Hyundai Ireland, and government departments from both north and south of the Border. The group wants to assess, and then push forward, ideas to bring hydrogen fuel for vehicles and public transport in Ireland.

The group’s initial report will be published on October 3rd, and one of its members, speaking to The Irish Times on background, confirmed that it will initially be aimed at “captive” fleets, whereby vehicles can be refuelled at a central depot. “It’s a central hub model, for now, rather than a distributed network. Our focus is on captive fleets, and Dublin Bus and CIÉ as a whole are both part of the group, and contributing to the discussions. Those early hydrogen fuelling stations would also be available for private users as well, to help encourage those who are interested in the technology.”

Hynduai FC 1 download

toyota_fcv__02_640x480-533x400-740x480

 

 

 

 

 

Currently, only two hydrogen fuelled cars are available on the market – the Toyota Mirai and the Hyundai Nexo – and neither is sold in Ireland, for the simple reason that there is currently nowhere to refuel them.

Rancorous

The debate over the potential of hydrogen power for cars is often a rancorous one, with Tesla’s Elon Musk describing the power source as “dumb” and apparent internal disagreements within the VW Group over whether to press ahead with hydrogen vehicle development (Audi says yes, VW says no).

That debate is acknowledged by the group. Dr Richard Riley, a senior consultant at Element Energy, says: “Our view is that just like today, where there are multiple fuels for transport, the future will see both battery electric and hydrogen vehicles on the market filling different needs.

It is more efficient just to put that electricity straight into a battery vehicle. However, some vehicle operating profiles especially large trucks, refuse collection vehicles, some bus routes, rural and commuter train routes, ferries, police and ambulance fleets etc are not well suited to batteries as the battery range and recharging are not flexible enough to meet operators needs.

“Refuelling takes no longer than a conventional petrol or diesel car, and the usable range of a fuel cell vehicle is about the same as an ordinary car”

“Initial stations need a captive fleet to ensure the demand for hydrogen which helps to bring the cost of hydrogen down. However, right from the start we plan for some of the stations to be open to the public so that the investments made by industry and fleets benefits the wider community. We have explored a few different options for early fleets including taxis, buses and refuse collection vehicles. Some interest has been expressed across all these fleets.”

An advantage

Hydrogen’s big advantage, as a fuel, is that it’s quick and easy to use by a driver. Refuelling takes no longer than a conventional petrol or diesel car, and the usable range of a fuel cell vehicle is about the same as an ordinary car. Given current battery and charger designs, that’s an advantage that hydrogen is unlikely to surrender to electric cars any time soon. There’s also the fact that hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe, and is relatively easily extracted from water.

“The only emission from a vehicle fuelled by hydrogen is water vapour, as the hydrogen combines in the fuel cell with oxygen, forming water, and generating an electrical current.”

That, however, is a rose-tinted view of hydrogen. While there have, in the past, been plans for vast solar-powered operations to extract hydrogen from seawater, much commercial hydrogen currently available is a by-product of fossil fuel extraction. On top of which, compressing it, transporting it and storing it all have significant energy consumption issues. The fuel cells themselves also suffer from some of the same issues surrounding batteries such as the use of rare-earth metals, which have to be expensively and messily mined.

Dr Riley says the hydrogen supply being proposed for Ireland comes is extracted using renewable electricity, a fact which might alleviate some of those concerns. Each of those 80 proposed hydrogen filling stations will require investment in the region of €1.5 – €2million.

The Government has made no commitments as yet on any incentives for such investments, but has, according to Dr Riley, “agreed that hydrogen shows great potential for Ireland and that the policies set out by the group to deliver hydrogen mobility are within the cost and policy limits that they committed to, to bring electric vehicles to market.”

“What we’re aiming to do is reach a point where other actors can start to make a decision to invest in hydrogen technology,” the group’s spokesperson said. “We need to reduce the unknowns, and raise the certainty level so that we can move from this phase through to implementation.

What we want to do is to have a highly visible, public strategy so that people can feel comfortable coming on board. This is not just an industry looking to feed itself – we’re drawing in a very broad spectrum of opinion from car makers, fleet operators, academics and policymakers.”

Lithium vs Hydrogen – EV’s vs Fuel Cells – A New Perspective of Mutual Evolution


Electric vehicle sales are pumping, with an ever-expanding network of charging stations around the world facilitating the transition from gas-guzzling automobiles, to sleek and technologically adept carbon-friendly alternatives.

With that in mind, the community of car and energy enthusiasts still continue to open up the old ‘Who would win in a fight, lithium vs hydrogen fuel cell technology?’.

 

Are hydrogen fuel cell cars doomed?

Imagine being the disgruntled owner of a hydrogen-powered car, only for lithium batteries to completely take the reigns of the industry and in effect, make your vehicle obsolete. It’s not really that wild of a notion, it’s far closer to reality than you may realize, as most electric car vehicle manufacturers consider lithium to be the battery of choice, and a more progressive development tool.

Any rechargeable device in your home, like your portable battery, your camera or even your iPhone, is using lithium. It’s clearly felt in the tech world that this is the path of least resistance for the future, but what does that mean for hydrogen fuel cell technology?

In 2017, with BMW announcing a 75% increase in BEV (Battery Electric Vehicles) sales, Hyundai came out and announced that they were going to focus almost entirely on lithium batteries. They’re not abandoning their fuel cell programme, but their next line of 10 electric vehicles will feature only 2 hydrogen options. Hyundai Executive VP Lee Kwang-guk stated, “We’re strengthening our eco-friendly car strategy, centering on electric vehicles”.

Is it likely that other manufacturers will follow suit? Well, with Tesla’s Elon Musk personally stating a preference for lithium (he called hydrogen fuel ‘incredibly dumb’), and both Toyota and Honda indicating that they will pour R&D funds into this type of battery (despite earlier hesitation), the answer seems to be ‘well, we already have’.

READ MORE:

Toyota vs Tesla – Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles vs Electric Cars

 (Article Continued Below)

Do ‘refueling’ and ‘recharging’ stations hold the key to success?

Did you know that as of May 2017 there were only 35 hydrogen refueling stations in the entire US, with 30 of those in California? Compared to the 16,000 electric vehicle refueling stations already available in the US, with more on the way, it would seem that the logical EV purchaser would opt for a car with a lithium battery. In China, there are already more than 215,000 electric charging stations, with over 600,000 more in planning to make the East Asian nation’s road system more accommodating to EVs.

On January 30th, 2018, REQUEST MORE INFO, invested $5m into ‘FreeWire Technologies’, a manufacturer of rapid-charging systems for EVs. The plan is to install these charging systems in their gas stations all over the UK, though they did not disclose how many. So, even on the other side of the Atlantic, building a network of charging systems is a high priority.

With ‘Range Anxiety’ (the fear that your battery will run out of juice before the next charging point) being a common concern for EV owners, the noticeably growing network of refueling stations, including those with ‘fast charge’ options, are seeming to settle down the crowd of anxious early adopters.

 

Will the market dictate the winner in the lithium vs hydrogen car battery ‘war’?

If we look at the effects of supply and demand, the early clarity of lithium batteries as the battery of choice for alternative energy vehicles meant that there were a great time and cause for development. As a result, between 2010 and 2016, lithium battery production costs reduced by 73%.

If this trajectory continues, price parity is a when, not an if, and that when could well be encouraging you to take a trip down to your local EV dealership for an upgrade.

Demand for EVs instead of hydrogen fuel cell technology means that some of the world’s largest vehicle manufacturers are showing a strong lean towards lithium batteries.

Hyundai, Honda, and VW are all putting hydrogen on the back burner. And whilst market demand for hydrogen is considerably lower, Toyota remains keen on fighting this battle, which they have been researching for around 25 years.

Their theory that hydrogen and lithium battery powered vehicles must be developed ‘at the same speed’ is a dogged one.

You could say their self-belief was completely rewarded by their faith in the Prius, with over 5 million global sales and comfortable status as the top-selling car (ever) in Japan, so there will be many who tune in to the Toyota line of thinking and overlook the market sentiment.

Price will always play a role in purchasing decisions, and with scalable cost reduction methods not yet visible or available for hydrogen fuel cell technology, it looks like lithium is going to be the battery that opens wallets.

 

Can lithium and hydrogen car batteries coexist?

Sure, they can co-exist, but ultimately one technology is going to come close to a monopoly while the other becomes a collector’s item, a novelty, just a blip in technological history. That’s just one theory of course. 

Another theory is that the pockets in which hydrogen fuel cell vehicles already exist and are somewhat popular, like Japan and California, will use their powerful economies to almost force their success.

Why would they do this? Because the vehicles are far more expensive than EVs by comparison, they had to start in wealthy regions, install fuelling stations and slowly spread out into other affluent neighborhoods.

It’s a long game that relies heavily on wealthy regions opting to choose the expensive inconvenience, a feat which could arguably be achieved simply by creating the most visually compelling vehicles rather than the most efficient. Style over substance, for lack of a better phrase.

Take a look! See how Lithium powers the world…

 

Which will stand the test of time?

Looking at this from a scientific perspective, one might say ‘Well, lithium is limited, whereas hydrogen is the most abundant gas in our atmosphere’, and one would be correct. However, science doesn’t always simplify things. Hydrogen is really hard and inefficient to capture, and therein lies a huge obstacle.

Hydrogen fuel is hard to make and distribute, too, with a very high refill cost. The final kick in the teeth is that the technology required to capture, make and distribute all of that hydrogen is not very good for the environment, and is arguably no ‘cleaner’ than gasoline. That same technology uses more electricity in the hydrogen-creation process than is currently needed to recharge lithium batteries, and therein lies the answer to this whole debate, right?

We aren’t saying lithium batteries will be around forever, but they’re more adaptable, useful, scalable and affordable as a technology, right now.

By the time hydrogen fuel cell technology is affordable to the average consumer, we will hopefully have found a true clean energy source.

 

Conclusion: Will the lithium vs hydrogen debate ever be over?

Lithium is this, hydrogen is that, EVs are this and that, HFCs are that and this. The cycle will perpetuate until it becomes clear which is the definitive solution, at least that’s the belief of Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who said ‘There’s no need for us to have this debate. I’ve said my piece on this, it will be super obvious as time goes by.’

To be fair though, this quote from George W Bush would beg to differ, when he is quoted as saying ‘Fuel cells will power cars with little or no waste at all. We happen to believe that fuel cell cars are the wave of the future; that fuel cells offer incredible opportunity’. Well, George, you may have been right back in 2003, but this is 2018.

Article Provided By

Mike is Chief Operating Officer of Dubuc Motors, a startup dedicated to the commercialization of electric vehicles targeting niche markets within the automotive industry.

Toyota and Panasonic are teaming up in massive EV battery cell venture, report says


Panasonic, Tesla’s battery cell partner, is reportedly teaming up with Toyota to create an important electric vehicle battery cell venture in China and Japan.

According to a report from Japan’s Nikkei, the two Japanese companies would create a new joint-venture that would result in Panasonic producing a large number of cells for the automaker”

“The venture, in which Toyota is to hold a 51% stake with Panasonic owning the rest, will be announced as soon as this week. Panasonic will shift five automotive battery production facilities in Japan and China to the new company, though the U.S. plant it operates under a partnership with American automaker Tesla will not be included.”

For Panasonic, it would represent shifting an important part of its battery cell production capacity to Toyota’s electric vehicle programs.

Read More: Toyota andPanasonic Explore ‘Prismatic’ Batteries Together

Toyota has fallen behind when it comes to all-electric vehicles as it preferred to focus on fuel cell cars for years.

Lately, it is tentatively making moves in the space since announcing an expansion of its electric car plans last year with 10 upcoming new BEVs.

The first one is supposed to launch next year and it also happens to be when this new venture with Panasonic is supposed to go into operation, according to Nikkei.

The joint-venture would not only supply batteries to Toyota vehicles but also other partners like Mazda and Subaru.

Again according to the report, it will also involve the production of next-generation battery cells, including solid-state batteries.

Just over a year ago, the two companies announced that they were exploring the possibility to cooperate on batteries.

Electrek’s Take

I’ve been saying it forever: if you want to see how serious an automaker is about electric vehicles, you need to look at what they are doing to secure battery cell supply.

Until now, I would have never said that Toyota was serious about EVs, but it could be the case if the report turns out to be true.

Interestingly, the deal appears to be reminiscent of Tesla’s battery partnership with Panasonic, but we would need more details to confirm that.

Either way, this could be very important news for the over industry. We will keep an eye out for more information.

Article by Fred Lambert

Fred is the Editor in Chief and Main Writer at Electrek.

What’s sparking electric-vehicle adoption in the truck industry?


OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERACommercial fleets could go electric rapidly. Understanding total cost of ownership and focusing on specific cases is critical.

There’s nothing new about electric trucks; they have labored on the streets of major cities across the world since the first decades of the 20th century.

Fleet managers prized these trucks for their strong pulling power and greater reliability than vehicles powered by early, fitful internal combustion engines (ICEs). And now, in a high-tech second act, both incumbent and nontraditional makers of commercial vehicles across most weight categories and a variety of segments are launching new “eTrucks.” A century on, the question is, why now?

We believe the time for this technology is ripe and that three drivers will support the eTruck market through 2030.

First, based on total cost of ownership (TCO), these trucks could be on par with diesels and alternative powertrains in the relative near term.

Second, robust electric-vehicle (EV) technology and infrastructure is becoming increasingly cost competitive and available.

Nikola Electric Truck 15616_26470_ACT

Nikola CEO: Fuel-Cell Class 8 truck on track for 2021 – SAE International

Third, adoption is being enabled by the regulatory environment, including country-level emission regulations (for example, potential carbon dioxide fleet targets) and local access policies (for example, emission-free zones).

At the same time, barriers to eTruck adoption exist: new vehicles must be proved to be reliable, consumers need to be educated, and employees, dealers, and customers will require training. Furthermore, there are challenges in managing the new supply chain and setting up the production of new vehicles.

Based on the analysis of many different scenarios—which are highly sensitive to a defined set of assumptions—our research shows that commercial-vehicle (CV) electrification will be driven at different rates across segments, depending on the specific characteristics of use cases.

Electrification is happening fast, and it’s happening now

Electric Truck II upsvanMcKinsey developed a granular assessment of battery-electric commercial vehicles (BECVs) for 27 CV segments across three different regions (China, Europe, and the United States), three weight classes, and three applications. The three weight classes are light-duty trucks (LDTs), medium-duty trucks (MDTs), and heavy-duty trucks (HDTs), while the three applications are urban, regional, and long-haul cycles. While our modeling also includes other alternative fuels and technologies such as mild hybrids, plug-in hybrids (PHEVs), natural gas, and fuel-cell electric CVs, this article focuses on full electrification.

Our model concentrates on two scenarios, “early adoption” and “late adoption,” to help place bookends for each weight class and geography (Exhibit 1). The two scenarios reflect different beliefs regarding core assumptions, such as the effectiveness of any regulatory push, the timing of infrastructure readiness, and the supply availability, which results in delay or advancement of uptake.

adoption scenarios for electric trucks in 3 weight classes in Europe, US, and China through 2030

Our research reveals strong potential uptake of BECVs, especially in the light- and medium-duty segments. Unlike decision criteria to purchase passenger cars, CV purchasing decisions place greater emphasis on economic calculations and reflect a greater sensitivity to regulation. Light- and medium-duty BECV segment adoption will probably lag that of passenger-car EVs through 2025 due to a lack of eTruck model availability and fleets that are risk averse. However, our analysis indicates that in an “early adoption” scenario, BECV share in light and medium duty could surpass car EV sales mix in some markets by 2030 due to undeniable TCO advantages for BECVs over diesel trucks.

Comparing the weight classes, our scenarios suggest low uptake in the HDT segment mainly because of high battery costs, and, as such, later TCO parity. In the MDT and LDT segments, our “late adoption” scenario suggests that BECVs could reach 8 to 27 percent sales penetration by 2030, depending on region and application. In our “early-adoption” scenario, with more aggressive assumptions about the expansion of low-emission zones in major cities, BECVs could reach 15 to 34 percent sales penetration by 2030.

The inflection point appears to be shortly after 2025, when demand could be supported by a significant tailwind from the expected tightening of regulation (for example, free-emission zones), in combination with increasing customer confidence, established charging infrastructure, model availability, and improved economics for a variety of use cases and applications.

TCO plays a more important role in commercial-vehicle purchasing considerations and modeling TCO helps companies understand the timing of TCO parity across different powertrain types. We analyzed the sensitivity of TCO parity to see how much earlier a specific use case with a custom-made technology package tailored to a predefined driving and charging pattern can break even. The illustration of the “race of eTrucks” shows the interval of potential TCO breakeven points for various applications and weight classes (Exhibit 2). The light-colored shade behind each point indicates how early a specific use case can potentially break even.

timeline for electric trucks (by weight class and miles traveled) reaching total-cost-of-ownership parity with diesel vehicles in Europe, US, and China through 2030

Medium average daily distances show the earliest TCO breakeven point. Looking across weight classes, we can identify an optimal daily driving distance that establishes TCO parity for eTrucks and diesels. In the example shown, the earliest breakeven point occurs at a distance travelled of about 200 kilometers a day. This sweet spot of operation means the battery is large enough to enable efficient operation without too many recharges, while ensuring sufficient annual distance to benefit from the lower cost per kilometer. At the same time, the battery is still small enough to limit upfront capital expenditures. This effect is strongest where the difference between electricity and diesel prices is high, as in the European Union, where taxes on fuels are high, resulting in a high price differential with electricity prices. In the United States, prices for fuel and electricity are both lower, as is the absolute price differential.

Urban city buses will break even earliest in the heavy-duty segment. Electric city buses—an adaptation of a purpose-built HDT—could break even the earliest in the HDT segment, between 2023 and 2025 for the average application. In China in 2016, the share of new EV bus sales already exceeded 30 percent1due to regulatory considerations. By 2030, EV city buses could reach about 50 percent if municipalities enact conducive policies. City and urban bus segments are likely to experience some of the highest BECV penetration levels in Europe and the United States.

The breakeven point for light-duty urban applications is sensitive to minor changes in use case. While the average LDT-segment truck could break even in 2021, by slightly modifying the use-case characteristics (for example, using a smaller battery, recharging during operation, or assuming higher energy efficiency due to disabled heating for urban parcel delivery), the case can reach parity today.

Three critical assumptions most affect TCO breakeven points.The assumptions that drive TCO uncertainties include the development of fuel and electricity efficiencies for ICE or BECV technologies, the cost of batteries, and the cost of fuel and electricity. Also, our analysis shows that the TCO breakeven of urban applications is more sensitive to changes in assumptions than it is for long-haul applications. That’s because the costs per kilometer associated with both BECVs and ICEs for long hauls remain closer to each other for a longer period. For example, a five percent improvement in a BECV’s TCO would shift the breakeven point by three to four years in urban applications, but only by about two years in long-haul applications.

Infrastructure readiness

The required charging infrastructure represents a major challenge to BECV uptake. Nevertheless, charging may not be as critical as it is for passenger cars, due to the predictability and repeatability of driving patterns and operational uses and the central nature of refueling. In general, charging infrastructure will be required at depots to enable charging when BECVs are not in use (for example, overnight). Building a supporting infrastructure will require investments by vehicle owners and, potentially, end users as well. (Our TCO modeling reflects the required cost of use-case-supporting charging infrastructure.) The possibility of charging while loading or unloading could drive earlier adoption because it has the potential to reduce cost based on smaller battery-size requirements.

Long-haul (and partly regional) applications will require in-route charging, for example, at motorways or resting areas. On the one hand, the high level of predictability of long-haul routes allows for concentrated investment in charging infrastructure. Companies can identify key routes and charging points and prioritize them for investment. Analysis shows that on popular routes a charging point every 80 to 100 kilometers could suffice for the early phases of HDT adoption, so the sheer number of charging points might not be the limiting factor.

Courtesy Of: McKinsey Center for Future Mobility 

Nikola Motors – Daimler – Toyota Challenge Tesla’s Metrics for the ‘Long-Haul’ – Will the Best Zero-Emissions Semi (Trucks) Run on Fuel Cells? Next-Gen Batteries? Both?


Toyota’s Project Portal and … a possibly “game-changing” semi from upstart Nikola Motors might prove FCEVs are the winning tech for the long-haul industry.

Last month, Tesla CEO Elon Musk rode onto the dais at Tesla’s design studio in Hawthorne, California aboard a futuristic semi truck.

Tesla Elec Semi I 4w2a6750

He exited the vehicle, collar popped, to introduce what looked to be a sleeker version of the colossal, decidedly unsexy commercial vehicles that rumble endlessly across America—and received the type of hysterical fanfare usually reserved for the Beyonces and Biebers of the world.

This marked one of the most anticipated, and curious, new-vehicle reveals of 2017: the Tesla Semi, a battery-electric-powered long-haul truck.

Tesla-Semi-truck-nikola-one

In his signature #humblebrag tone, Musk ticked off the Class 8 truck’s impressive capabilities: It can tow 80,000 pounds, the most allowed on US highways, for a range of 500 miles.

It has aerodynamics better than a Bugatti Chiron, a unique central seating position, and comes standard with enhanced AutoPilot, meaning it should never jackknife.

Also: it’s guaranteed not to break down for one million miles; it has a shatterproof windshield; and it implements a kinetic-energy-recovery system (KERS) in such a way that it will never need brake pads – in short WOW!

Plus, with a motor on each of the four rear wheels, it can rocket from 0-60 mph in five seconds flat—one-third the time of the average diesel semi.

Even fully loaded, that number increases to a scant 20 seconds, or a full minute faster than its smog-belching contemporaries. When towing up a five-percent grade, the Tesla can reach speeds of 65 mph, which is 20 mph faster than a diesel.

Taken in aggregate, these features and numbers would greatly benefit a trucker’s route in both speed and cost savings. They are eye-popping metrics; almost unbelievable. Which is perhaps why some are having a hard time believing them.

More important than what Musk said during his November announcement was what he didn’t say. For instance, there was no mention at all about the battery pack that will power the Tesla Semi to these magical thresholds. There was no mention of total weight or cost, which are arguably the two most important variables for long-haul shippers.

In terms of charging these unknown batteries, Musk promised a 400-mile recharge in the course of about 30 minutes. Based on recent estimates in Bloomberg New Energy Finance, hitting those numbers would require a charging system ten times more powerful than Tesla’s own Superchargers—currently the fastest consumer charging network in the world.

The cost building stations that could hit those figures would be profound, as would be the potential stress on the electrical system from multiple trucks charging simultaneously.

Bloomberg estimated that in order to fulfill Musk’s promises the truck would require a battery capacity between 600 and 1,000 kilowatt-hours.

Assuming a down-the-middle number of 800 kWh, that would necessitate a battery of more than 10,000 pounds, with a likely price tag north of $100,000. Musk also claims the Semi will be 20 percent less expensive than a diesel truck per mile—but that is with customers only paying $0.07/kWh.

Experts estimate that Tesla will have to pay, on average, a minimum of $0.40/kWh* for “green” electricity—meaning the company would have to heavily subsidize charging costs for fleets of trucks sucking down terawatts of electricity.

So, in order to hit Musk’s stated targets, Tesla will require batteries that don’t, as far as anyone knows, exist; charging capability faster than anything on the planet; and rates far below current market value.

“I don’t understand how that works,” electric vehicle analyst Salim Morsy told Bloomberg. “I really don’t.” Investor’s Business Daily dubbed Musk’s claims “monuments of envelope pushing.”

“The biggest concern that I have is that this is a typical Elon Musk ‘shiny object’ announcement to prop up Tesla’s stock price and distract from all of the issues he is having with Model 3 production,” an engineer associated with the hydrogen industry, who asked to remain anonymous, told us, referencing recent production delays and Tesla’s loss of over $1.3 billion year-to-date.

“I don’t mean to be negative; I do believe in battery technology and its merits, and I also believe that we will continue to see significant improvements in battery cost and performance during the coming decades.

But as a scientist and engineer I have always found Elon Musk’s lack of scientific accuracy and ability to overstate and exaggerate truth, and get away with it, very annoying and disingenuous.”

Tesla did not respond to requests to clarify these apparent discrepancies for this article.

The Truth About EV Trucks

Musk is not alone in the world of heavy-duty battery-electric trucks. VW recently announced a $1.7 billion investment towards developing electric powertrains for trucks and buses. Daimler, the world’s largest truck maker, unveiled an all-electric heavy-duty concept dubbed the E-FUSO Vision ONE at the Tokyo Motor Show, in late October. Daimler’s Class 8 truck promises a significantly more modest 220-mile range, with a payload 1.8 tons less than its diesel counterpart, and utilizing a 300 kWh battery pack. On paper, these figures make the E-FUSO Vision ONE more plausible than the Tesla Semi.

Project Portal Toyota maxresdefault

Of course Musk, a man who has promised to colonize Mars and builds spaceships to commute to the International Space Station, has never been known for making anything less than bold announcements.

But shorter-range BEV trucks do have a place in the transportation ecosystem.This is known as “last mile” and “short haul,” where deliveries are made inter-city, or within 100 miles. In such a capacity, the Tesla Semi could be greatly successful.

The semi truck business is a $30-billion-per-year industry in the United States alone, so there’s plenty of money to go around. But the Semi’s utility in true long-haul applications remains questionable.

Toyota’s Project Portal

Project Portal, a Real-World Zero-Emission Semi

Toyota has logged more than 4,000 development miles in a zero-emission Class 8 truck pulling drayage-rated cargo. This proof-of-concept semi, dubbed Project Portal, boasts 670 horsepower, 1,325 lb-ft of torque, and a 200-mile range. Rather than being powered strictly by battery pack—in this case, a comparatively small, 12kWh unit—Project Portal also utilizes twin fuel cell stacks plumbed from the Toyota Mirai consumer vehicle.

Project Portal II maxresdefault (2)

Project Portal has been moving goods around the Port of Los Angeles since April, and on October 23 expanded its routes to distribution warehouses and nearby rail yards. The idea is to collect data while the truck performs real-world drayage duties, its itineraries increasing as the study progresses.

Like the Tesla Semi, Project Portal also boasts impressive acceleration versus a traditional diesel truck: 8.9 seconds to travel 1/8th of a mile versus 14.6 seconds. Unlike the Tesla Semi, however, it’s already at work in the real world, even moving supplies and auto parts for Toyota throughout Southern California. Its numbers are verifiable.

In order to supply the Project Portal truck, as well as a growing fleet of FCEV semis as the project scales in size, Toyota announced last week that it would build the world’s first megawatt-scale hydrogen power station at the Port of Long Beach.

The power plant will generate 2.35 megawatts of electricity and 1.2 tons of hydrogen each day, enough to supply power and fuel to 2,350 homes and 1,500 FCEVs, respectively. Moreover, the Tri-Gen plant will generate so-called “green hydrogen” because it will be powered by 100-percent renewable sources, like local farm bio-waste. (Currently, most hydrogen is created via “cracking” natural gas, meaning splitting the CH4 into two H2 molecules and a free carbon atom.) Toyota could then claim the Project Portal trucks to be zero-emission from well-to-wheel.

Nikola Motors Arrives on the Scene With Bold Claims

A recent surprise player in the FCEV semi game is Utah-based Nikola Motors, makers of an announced Class 8 truck dubbed the Nikola One, a 320 kWh-powered tractor-trailer that will reportedly generate over 1,000-hp and 2,000 lb-ft of torque. Nikola Motors has also set the formidable goal of building a proprietary refueling station network across America, with over 700 planned H2 stations to be constructed in the next 10 years. As ambitious as that sounds, Nikola has an innovative business plan to scale up its stations. 

Nikola I Trevor-Milton-Nikola-Motor-CEO-on-truck

Nikola Motors CEO Trevor Milton

“We’re selling to fleets that run the same route every day,” says Nikola Motors CEO Trevor Milton. “So they’ll put an order in for 500 trucks, and we’ll build the stations before they come online.” A medium-size station will be constructed on each end of the route, allowing Nikola to establish flagship stations in each of those two terminal cities. With a range between 500 and 1,200 miles, depending on terrain, for their Nikola One, these stations can be quite far apart. Nikola plans to start with 16 stations located in the Midwest and East Coast, to be completed by 2019, at a cost of about $10 million apiece. Initially, there will be four test trucks running in 2018, with a planned 250 by 2019, and a total of 750 by 2020. Nikola plans to hit full production in 2021.

Rather than through a traditional lease, Nikola’s business model will be to charge customers solely on a per-mile basis. Nikola estimates the cost of a diesel semi runs between $1 to $1.25 per mile—this includes fuel, lease, tires, warranty, service, maintenance, etc.—though Milton says that with the Nikola One a driver is paying “anywhere between 20 to 40 percent less than that.”

“You don’t have to wait for 3 years to get your money back—you get your money back starting from day one,” Milton says.

While customers pay per mile (from $0.85 per mile for cheaper models up to $1.00/mile for the most expensive) all other costs of running the truck save insurance—from wipers and tires to all maintenance and fuel—are covered by Nikola Motors.

“That’s the golden egg,” Milton says. “How do you provide something that has no emission, that has better performance at less cost? And that’s what we’ve been able to do,” he says. “You won’t even be able to buy a diesel in 10 years because you’re going to be losing over a zero-emission vehicle.”

With over 8,000 trucks reserved in their first month of unveiling, Milton has no doubt they will have the necessary customers to fill out the initial 750 truck order, and more. “We’re on track, probably, to being more than 10-15 years booked out once we hit the assembly line,” he says. “We have more customers than we know what to do with.”

As far as Tesla’s news, Milton believes the Semi will be successful for short-haul work, estimating the truck’s real-world range will probably be around 350 miles—not nearly long enough for long-haul purposes.

“Their battery alone will weigh more than our entire truck,” he says, estimating the Semi’s lithium-ion pack will weigh about 15,000 pounds.

“We don’t really see them as a competitor on our end, just because our truck can outperform their truck in every category, every time, in every situation,” Milton says. “And [Nikola One can do] it two to three times further than they can, at a 10,000-pound weight difference. But it’s good that they’re coming in teaching people that electric can work, because we need all the help we can get in the industry to prove electric trucks work.”

Competitors or colleagues, Musk and Milton share a capacity for eyebrow-raising claims. When we first spoke with Milton in the spring for a longer feature on this site about the current state of the global hydrogen industry, he claimed he would require every Nikola station to produce 100 percent of its hydrogen via renewables like solar energy—a stipulation that would make the Nikola One, like Project Portal trucks fueled by the Tri-Gen bio-waste-powered plant, truly zero-emission from wheel to well.

“We will produce all the H2 on every one of our stations onsite via electrolysis,” Milton said at the time.

The math didn’t appear to add up. Using National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) algorithms of energy production via solar cells, we deduced the lowest-capacity stations, at 12,500 kgs, would require a 540-acre solar farm to produce the necessary H2. We followed up with Nikola for clarification, and the company responded that, according to their calculations, they would each require “just over 218 acres.” Even with this considerable reduction, the idea that 700-plus stations across America would each be connected to a 218-acre solar fields seemed highly unlikely.

When we spoke more recently, Milton had softened his stance.

“I’ve definitely lessened on that, but it’s more of a philosophy, not as an actual message,” he said. “We have to take energy from the grid, but the way we get that energy is guaranteed that it’s zero-emission. We just don’t want a gigantic diesel plant powering our hydrogen.”

Instead, Milton now says, one-third of Nikola’s energy will be produced on-site, while the remainder will be bought from other green sources, whether that means from renewables, from power plants at excess capacity, or the grid via guaranteed zero-emission sources.

“There are multiple ways we’ll be buying and getting energy into our hydrogen production, but it’s not one-size-fits-all, that’s for sure. And if we made it sound like that, we apologize; we were mainly just trying to educate people that we are going to mandate that almost all of our energy is zero-emission from production to consumption.

“We’re evolving every month, as we get all these orders going in. We’re learning. There’s little things we’re tweaking, but ultimately our overall philosophy is it’s our duty and our goal to get rid of all the diesels and all the emissions on the road. And we’ll get there soon, it’ll just take some time.”

Regardless of the historical challenges inherent to starting any automotive brand, some people are hopeful about Nikola’s future.

“Building up a hydrogen eco-system entails many—and very different—elements,” says Yorgo Chatzimarkakis, Secretary General of the hydrogen-advocacy group Hydrogen Europe. After invoking the myriad doubts that Elon Musk faced when launching Tesla, he continues. “Some areas of a hydrogen-based economy need visionaries who have ambitions that do not seem plausible at the moment but are doable, and absolutely make sense in the long run.”

The Realities of a Zero-Emission Future

The point here isn’t to denigrate Tesla specifically, or BEVs in general. In order to achieve a zero emission transportation future—the goal of an increasing number of nations worldwide—many think that we should not have to choose between BEVs and FCEVs. Each has its clear advantages. 

As we’ve outlined in detail before, a zero-emission future will likely require the right solution for specific applications. Battery-electric power excels in smaller vehicles and for shorter ranges, while FCEVs are better suited for heavy-duty jobs that demand intense energy consumption and longer ranges. It need not be a zero-sum game.

Musk has accomplished enough already to warrant the benefit of the doubt for his bold Semi claims. Just this summer, he made a bet on Twitter that he could install a 100-megawatt battery storage facility in the South Australian outback within 100 days—or it would be free. Many doubted the billionaire futurist’s wager, but sure enough, by December 1 the facility was online and functional. During his comet-streak career he has made a habit of unflinching claims doubted by the masses, and has often enough enjoyed the last laugh.

However, Musk also has a history of disparaging hydrogen and FCEVs as legitimate transportation alternatives, calling them “incredibly dumb” and “bullshit.” This position is not only erroneous and misleading, but also dangerous and counterproductive to the same zero-emission future that he repeatedly touts. As the founder and CEO of the most valuable BEV company in the world by far—in fact, Wall Street considers Tesla the most valuable American automaker, having surpassed General Motors in April—it benefits him tremendously if that future is strictly BEV-powered.

The potential problem with Musk’s Semi assertions wouldn’t be that they’re possible embellishments about the capabilities of a BEV truck—he certainly wouldn’t be the first CEO to promise the impossible to prop up stock value—as much as their potential to salt the earth for FCEV semi truck growth. Claiming that BEV semis are a better solution than FCEVs would be fine on a barstool or in a vacuum, but the incredible power of Musk’s voice in the tech and transportation markets could devalue the viability of Class 8 vehicles powered by fuel cells.

Case in point: Bloomberg reported that immediately after Musk’s Tesla Semi announcement, share prices of truck and truck component makers dropped. They recovered when analysts had time to sift through the available information, but Musk potentially hobbling a critical cog of a zero-emission future runs contrary to his stated goals of saving the planet.

In the end, if Tesla, Daimler, Toyota and Nikola can get their respective FCEV and BEV semis off the ground, the impact would be tectonic. Using average estimates, every single alternative-powertrain truck replacing a similar ICE-powered vehicle would remove about 173 tons of CO2 emissions each year. Scale that to a fleet of 1,000, or 100,000, or a million trucks, and the impact on the climate and air quality would be profound. Musk should be free to do what he needs to in order to ensure his company succeeds, except when it values Tesla’s bottom line over that of the planet.

*Note: This article was updated to reflect that the stated price of $0.40/kWh is specifically for so-called “green” electricity harnessed from renewable or zero-emission sources.

A Hydrogen Fuel-Powered Truck hits the Road, emitting only Water Vapor!


Hydrogen Truck Project-Portal-Toyota-fuel-cell-truck-full-grilleA concept truck by Toyota is powered by hydrogen fuel cells and emits nothing but water vapor. Photo Credit: Toyota

 

Vehicles powered by alternatives to fossil fuel are on the roll. Literally. The Japanese automaker Toyota is rolling out a new line of vehicles powered by hydrogen fuel cells. A concept version of a long-haul truck with the car manufacturer’s new hydrogen-based engine in it will set out with a full load of cargo from Los Angeles and make its way to Long Beach.

“If you see a big-rig driving around the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach that seems oddly quiet and quick, do not be alarmed! It’s just the future,” Toyota quips in a statement issued to the press. The trial is part of the Japanese company’s feasibility studies for its brand-new “Project Portal” – a hydrogen fuel cell systemdesigned for heavy-duty trucks. Toyota touts its Project Portal as the next step in its development of zero-emission fuel cell technology for industrial uses.

“[The trial’s] localized, frequent route patterns are designed to test the demanding drayage duty-cycle capabilities of the fuel cell system while capturing real world performance data,” Toyota explains  of its upcoming test runs. “As the study progresses, longer haul routes will be introduced.”

Toyota’s heavy-duty concept truck boasts a beast of an engine with more than 670 horsepower and 1,325 pound feet of torque thanks to a pair of Mirai fuel cell stacks and a relatively small 12kWh battery. The truck’s gross weight capacity is over 36,000kg while its projected driving range is more than 320km per fill under normal drayage conditions.

Comparable long-haul trucks, if powered by gasoline, emit plenty of CO2. Not this new one, though. “The zero-emission class 8 truck proof of concept has completed more than 4,000 successful development miles, while progressively pulling drayage rated cargo weight, and emitting nothing but water vapor,” the company explains.

You’ve read that right: the truck will emit water vapor and nothing else. This means that the technology, once it is put into use on a wider scale, can help us reduce our CO2 emissions in an effort to mitigate the effects of climate change.

Could hydrogen vehicles take over as the “green” car of choice?


1-Toyota Hydro 1416262251402Now that car makers have demonstrated through hybrid vehicle success that consumers want less-polluting tailpipes, they are shifting even greener. In 2015, Toyota will roll out the first hydrogen fuel-cell car for personal use that emits only water. An article in Chemical & Engineering News (C&EN), the weekly newsmagazine of the American Chemical Society, explains how hydrogen could supplant hybrid and electric car technology — and someday, even spur the demise of the gasoline engine.

Melody M. Bomgardner, a senior editor at C&EN, notes that the first fuel-cell vehicles will be sold in Japan, then California to start. Although Toyota is the only one poised to sell fuel-cell vehicles very soon, other companies are also investing billions of dollars in the technology. Hyundai, General Motors, Honda and Daimler have all announced plans to offer their own hydrogen models in the near future. The first cars will set customers back about $70,000, but this marks a 95 percent cut in system costs in less than 10 years. As they improve the technology further, car manufacturers expect that prices will come down to more affordable levels.

1-Toyota Hydro 1416262251402

In 2015, Toyota will be the first car maker to bring a personal, hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle to the market.

Credit: Toyota            

 But does that translate into a practical edge for consumers? With a hydrogen vehicle, filling up only takes about three minutes, compared to an overnight charge for an all-electric car. Fuel-cell vehicles can go 400 miles on one fill-up, which is fewer than a hybrid but with no polluting emissions. Although electrics also boast zero tailpipe emissions, they will have a tough time competing with that kind of range. Given these advantages, some experts suggest hydrogen fuel cells could someday overtake hybrid, electric and even internal combustion technologies.

                  

Source: American Chemical Society

New Nanomaterial Increases Yield of Solar Cells


 

New nanomaterial increases yield of solar cells  6 hours ago

Linked quantum dots – In the new nanomaterial two or more electrons jump across the band gap as a consequence of just a single light particle (arrow with waves) being absorbed. Using special molecules the researchers have strongly linked the …more

Researchers from the FOM Foundation, Delft University of Technology, Toyota Motor Europe and the University of California have developed a nanostructure with which they can make solar cells highly efficient. The researchers published their findings on 23 August 2Researchers from the FOM Foundation, Delft University of Technology, Toyota Motor Europe and the University of California have developed a nanostructure with which they can make solar cells highly efficient. The researchers published their findings on 23 August 2013 in the online edition of Nature Communications.

Smart nanostructures can increase the yield of . An international team of researchers including physicists from the FOM Foundation, Delft University of Technology and Toyota, have now optimised the so that the solar cell provides more electricity and loses less energy in the form of heat.

Solar cells

A conventional solar cell contains a layer of silicon. When sunlight falls on this layer, in the silicon absorb the energy of the (photons). Using this energy the electrons jump across a ‘‘, as a result of which they can freely move and electricity flows.

The yield of a solar cell is optimised if the is equal to the band gap of silicon. Sunlight, however, contains many photons with energies greater than the band gap. The excess energy is lost as heat, which limits the yield of a conventional solar cell.

Nanospheres

Several years ago the researchers from Delft University of Technology, as well as other physicists, demonstrated that the excess energy could still be put to good use. In small spheres of a the enables extra electrons to jump across the band gap. These nanospheres, the so-called , have a diameter of just one ten thousandth of a .

If a light particle enables an electron in a quantum dot to cross the band gap, the electron moves around in the dot. That ensures that the electron collides with other electrons that subsequently jump across the band gap as well. As a result of this process a single photon can mobilize several electrons thereby multiplying the amount of current produced.

Contact between quantum dots

However, up until now the problem was that the electrons remained trapped in their quantum dots and so could not contribute to the current in the solar cell. That was due to the large molecules that stabilize the surface of quantum dots. These large molecules hinder the electrons jumping from one quantum dot to the next and so no current flows.

In the new design, the researchers replaced the large molecules with small molecules and filled the empty space between the quantum dots with aluminium oxide. This led to far more contact between the quantum dots allowing the electrons to move freely.

Yield

Using laser spectroscopy the physicists saw that a single photon indeed caused the release of several electrons in the material containing linked quantum dots. All of the electrons that jumped across the band gap moved freely around in the material. As a result of this the theoretical yield of solar cells containing such materials rises to 45%, which is more than 10% higher than a conventional solar cell.

This more efficient type of solar cell is easy to produce: the structure of linked nanospheres can be applied to the solar cell as a type of layered paint. Consequently the new solar cells will not only be more efficient but also cheaper than conventional cells.

The Dutch researchers now want to work with international partners to produce complete solar cells using this design.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-08-nanomaterial-yield-solar-cells.html#jCpn mobilise several electrons thereby multiplying the amount of current produced.

 

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-08-nanomaterial-yield-solar-cells.html#jCp

Better Batteries May Spark New Consumer Devices, Cars


QDOTS imagesCAKXSY1K 8BASF (BASFY), Toyota  (TM) and IBM  (IBM) are among companies placing sizable  early bets on next-generation batteries that could better power things big or  small, such as electric cars or maybe wristwatch computers, according to Lux  Research analyst Cosmin Laslau. But not for a while.

First the new batteries might get a real-world test powering unmanned aerial  vehicles — drones and microvehicles — for the military, he says, as it’s a case  where the customer might be willing to pay double for a 10% improvement in power  for the weight. Several new technologies could deliver up to 10 times more  energy than today’s batteries, Lux Research says in a new report.

The current Lithium-ion (Li-ion) battery market is worth north of $10  billion, Laslau says. But for now applications are limited at the small end by  how much power output the batteries have for their size — think of how much  space the battery of an Apple (AAPL)  iPhone takes up. On the big end of applications are electric cars, where the  cost of a large-enough battery to provide a useful number of miles in driving  range is a limiting factor. Size is an issue there, too.

“When you get to large size like say a Tesla (TSLA)  electric vehicle, in order to get the range people want … it might cost  $30,000 for the battery alone,” Laslau said.

The report, “Beyond Lithium-Ion: A Roadmap for Next-Generation Batteries,”  that Laslau put together with two contributors sees military users as the entry  point for next-gen batteries around 2020 and consumer electronics adopting new  solid-state batteries by 2030, but it’s a hard sell for next-gen batteries in  transportation to unseat Li-ion batteries. Meanwhile, research and other kinds  of gains are expected to continue improving those and push down costs.

The next-gen battery types that could be Li-ion alternatives go by names such as Lithium-air, Lithium-sulfur, Solid-state (ceramic or polymer) and Zinc-air. They have different safety and power profiles, with solid-state having a safety edge. Several startups, such as PolyPlus, Sion Power and Oxis Energy, are working on next-gen types, and Laslau says one hard part is translating them from prototype to production. BASF has put $50 million into Sion, he adds.

The report notes that giants such as IBM, Bosch, Toyota and BMW are active in  battery research — and the last two recently partnered on it.

Some government-backed battery startups “have failed spectacularly,” Laslau  said, with A123 Systems the prime example.

“Now the U.S. has changed tack and put $120 million into Argonne National  Lab’s JCESR, the Joint Center for Energy Storage Research,” he said. It will  focus on fundamental R&D rather than making bets on startups.

“We think this is a very promising development,” Laslau said, noting that the  lab is also partnering “with really well-established companies like Johnson  Controls (JCI) that have the expertise to  mass-produce any prototypes.” Other partners include Dow  Chemical (DOW) and Applied  Materials (AMAT).

Read More At Investor’s Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/technology/032013-648660-next-generation-batteries-might-power-smartwatches-electric-cars.htm#ixzz2QpxswlBF Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook