Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

OKIsItJustMe

(22,099 posts)
11. The comparison to an internal combustion engine doesn’t seem apropos
Fri May 8, 2015, 04:45 PM
May 2015

The primary difference between a fuel cell electric vehicle and a battery electric vehicle is that the battery electric vehicle must carry around a large storage battery, which needs to be recharged, while a fuel cell electric vehicle needs to carry around a fuel cell, and a tank(s) which needs to be refilled.

  • The Toyota Mirai has greater range on full tanks than a Tesla Model S has with a full storage battery.
  • The Mirai can be refilled faster than a Model S can be recharged.
These “convenience factors” are clear advantages.
  • The Model S can be recharged at home (assuming you have a private garage, or some other arrangement.)—In theory, the Mirai can be refilled at home, but this is much less likely.
  • The hydrogen to fill a Mirai will cost more than the electricity to charge a Model S (even though, reportedly, the first three years of hydrogen for your new Mirai will be free.)

However, if your income is high enough for you to buy either vehicle, I don’t think the cost of operation is going to bother you.


To increase the range of a BEV means a larger, heavier battery (which means a less efficient vehicle.) To increase the range of a HFCEV means a larger (but not much heavier) tank(s.)

At some point, the weight of batteries makes them impractical. Is that a locamotive? A tractor-trailer? A bus? An SUV? or a Midsize sedan?

I think we’ll see BEV’s be most popular for small, commuter vehicles. I may be wrong.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

It's a net energy loss from the start, and then we don't have a hydrogen infrastructure. Fail! Gregorian May 2015 #1
I've about had enough of your bullsh*t nationalize the fed May 2015 #2
I'm not doing it for me. I'm doing it for the people who might not know better. Gregorian May 2015 #3
“A net energy loss from the start” OKIsItJustMe May 2015 #6
I agree. Gregorian May 2015 #7
Except that I disagree; it’s far from a “no brainer” OKIsItJustMe May 2015 #8
Yes, but the topic is about cars, and that's not a best use. Gregorian May 2015 #10
The comparison to an internal combustion engine doesn’t seem apropos OKIsItJustMe May 2015 #11
Imperfect Graphene Opens Door to Better Fuel Cells OKIsItJustMe May 2015 #14
Sorry, I spaced on that reply. My brain was somewhere else. Gregorian May 2015 #15
“The big bottom line for me is the infrastructure, or lack thereof.” OKIsItJustMe May 2015 #16
I can't figure out how this will ever be economically feasible? mackdaddy May 2015 #4
Because it maintains a business model caraher May 2015 #5
I think Chu (and Toyota) are right OKIsItJustMe May 2015 #9
Not really. hunter May 2015 #12
Now, wait a second here OKIsItJustMe May 2015 #13
Ever compare the cost of a hydrogen fueling station to a charging station? caraher May 2015 #17
How many charging stations are needed to support as many cars as one filling station? OKIsItJustMe May 2015 #18
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Germany's first hydrogen ...»Reply #11