EV to save the planet? Maybe not ...

ashenfie

Well-known Member
£77 of electricity gets me about 3000 miles in our EV when charging at home. If I really wanted to cheap out and use only Tesla Supercharger £77 would last pretty much forever as our car has 'free for life' access to Tesla chargers :).
HaHa Last I heard for the model 3 no free supercharging as Mr Musk need to money to avoid go to the wall. Model S/X if your paying 75K upward you get free charging.

Me I paid £17K for a 2 year old 30K BMW in Mint condition. So thats 58k in the bank unless I do 542,337 miles. I do around 10K a year and keeps car 3 years second hand cash purchases.

So as they say there is no such thing as a free shirt, it's all in the purchase price.

Loads of love for, Mr Musk but I have a feeling he going revolutionise car industry but be the Delorean of the future.

So for sure it not about cost it's what best for the planet. EV has a place once we sort the source of the electricity out and how the we charge all of these cars. So for now they Halo products for want to be greens.
 

Clem_Dye

Well-known Member
I think that hydrogen has a place in the EV world. It negates many issues (range anxiety, charging times, etc.) but of course does come with its own set of issues. That the likes of BMW seem to be considering it is encouraging. Hydrogen/battery technology is now being tested on the UK rail network, as an alternative to dual mode diesel/electric trains, as it has the potential to negate the costs of overhead electrification.

EV has a long way to go yet before it displaces what we have now. Banging on about the environment is a good thing if it gets the attention it definitely needs in the media (for example), but without the means to help people change it’s not going to happen in a hurry.

Clem
 

Delvey

Distinguished Member
£77 of electricity gets me about 3000 miles in our EV when charging at home. If I really wanted to cheap out and use only Tesla Supercharger £77 would last pretty much forever as our car has 'free for life' access to Tesla chargers :).
Tesla no longer offer free for life charging.
This is boring now. I get it, you can afford a £90k EV. Most people cannot. Most people cannot charge at home. A Renault zoe doesn't offer the range I require and I am not spending (at the moment) £35k on a car. Public charging is rather too slow or too expensive (and probably cheaper in diesel).
You've still yet to answer most of my issues about owning a EV, and again, this is boring until you do so
 

Delvey

Distinguished Member
I think that hydrogen has a place in the EV world. It negates many issues (range anxiety, charging times, etc.) but of course does come with its own set of issues. That the likes of BMW seem to be considering it is encouraging. Hydrogen/battery technology is now being tested on the UK rail network, as an alternative to dual mode diesel/electric trains, as it has the potential to negate the costs of overhead electrification.

EV has a long way to go yet before it displaces what we have now. Banging on about the environment is a good thing if it gets the attention it definitely needs in the media (for example), but without the means to help people change it’s not going to happen in a hurry.

Clem
Exactly. EVs will probably be fine for cars and motorbikes. (The misses has barred me from owning one, or else I would buy a Zero)
But for everything else? The battery weight alone makes it unviable
So hydrogen (or another fuel source) will also be part of the future, replacing, or along side battery power
 

Clem_Dye

Well-known Member
I see a place for hydrogen-powered vehicles, and I think that this article supports that argument: Hyundai: Plug-in electric cars are ‘quick fix’ but hydrogen must be part of future . Infrastructure aside, the big elephant in the room for me though is the explosive nature of hydrogen gas. Setting that aside, converting petrol stations to sell hydrogen means a quick fill-up at the pumps, no having to wait for a fast or an overnight charge, reduced range anxiety.

As the article does highlight, generating hydrogen takes a lot of energy, but then that's no different in real terms from generating electricity using gas as I see it. Fine if you can use solar generation, but in northern Europe that's not a given.

As the Chinese say (I believe): "We live in interesting times."

Clem
 

Delvey

Distinguished Member
I see a place for hydrogen-powered vehicles, and I think that this article supports that argument: Hyundai: Plug-in electric cars are ‘quick fix’ but hydrogen must be part of future . Infrastructure aside, the big elephant in the room for me though is the explosive nature of hydrogen gas. Setting that aside, converting petrol stations to sell hydrogen means a quick fill-up at the pumps, no having to wait for a fast or an overnight charge, reduced range anxiety.

As the article does highlight, generating hydrogen takes a lot of energy, but then that's no different in real terms from generating electricity using gas as I see it. Fine if you can use solar generation, but in northern Europe that's not a given.

As the Chinese say (I believe): "We live in interesting times."

Clem
The explosive nature of hydrogen is a concern. But petrol is also highly flammable, and the gas in your house is also a little skitty with ignition.
I have seen some gas tanks designs where as if they fail and explodes, it is to the rear of the vehicle.
A good thing if you are in the vehicle, not so if you are behind.
In regards to the large amount of energy required, I am sure this will be reduced in the future. Oil is not exactly energy free from extraction to the forecourt, and obviously oil spills are, though rare, massively damaging to the environment I'm the sea (BP gulf of Mexico for example).
 

gangzoom

Well-known Member
Tesla no longer offer free for life charging.
This is boring now. I get it, you can afford a £90k EV. Most people cannot. Most people cannot charge at home.
Actually Tesla have pretty much offered 'free for life charging' on some/all of their cars constantly. Currently its inventory S/X stock, but come end of June pretty much all Model 3 stock will have it.

A Model 3 is £38K not £90K, even our Model X wasn't £90K.

As for home charging, if you actually read the reports most households with a car, infact nearly 70% of households with 1 car has access to off road parking according to the RAC, and if your a 2 car family that figure is over 80% - Page 11 of the linked report.

So your statment should read, Most car owners CAN charge at home.

It doesn't take away from the fact it doesn't work for you at present, but for most car owners charging at home is not going to be an issue.

https://www.racfoundation.org/assets/rac_foundation/content/downloadables/spaced_out-bates_leibling-jul12.pdf
 

Delvey

Distinguished Member
Actually Tesla have pretty much offered 'free for life charging' on some/all of their cars constantly. Currently its inventory S/X stock, but come end of June pretty much all Model 3 stock will have it.

A Model 3 is £38K not £90K, even our Model X wasn't £90K.

As for home charging, if you actually read the reports most households with a car, infact nearly 70% of households with 1 car has access to off road parking according to the RAC, and if your a 2 car family that figure is over 80% - Page 11 of the linked report.

So your statment should read, Most car owners CAN charge at home.

It doesn't take away from the fact it doesn't work for you at present, but for most car owners charging at home is not going to be an issue.

https://www.racfoundation.org/assets/rac_foundation/content/downloadables/spaced_out-bates_leibling-jul12.pdf
Ahh I get it. If you can afford 2 cars then the chances are you can afford a driveway. So only rich people have EVs. I see it now. All along your just a class snob
Screenshot_20190609-203105_Drive.jpg


These figures again specify a small pool (less than 1%) of housing in the UK. So sure less than 1% is the majority :D:rotfl:
So for example 70% of the city of London have access to off street parking. No chance.

And these rubbish figures everyone keeps quoting with only less than 1% of all houses in the UK, would you claim a plane is safe, if only 1% of its parts had been tested, but 70% had passed. No chance
 
Last edited:

gangzoom

Well-known Member
And these rubbish figures everyone keeps quoting with only less than 1% of all houses in the UK, would you claim a plane is safe, if only 1% of its parts had been tested, but 70% had passed. No chance
You don't seem to understand how the concept of data sampling and confidence intervals.

Surveying 100% of any population is impossible and unnecessary. You have to understand and correct for bias but sampling a small proportion of a population to gather a bigger picture is corner stone of modern day data analysis.

Here is another government document showing the same data but more recent.

70% of properties in the UK has either a garage or off road parking, with the majority of the rest having 'adequate' street side parking.

Don't confuse your situation with lack of parking with the bigger picture.

As for London you can argue why would you need a car with so many buses and trains serving the centre? My parents live in London their car had done 18k in 10 years!!

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6748/2173483.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjgyJmW8N7iAhWoSRUIHSO9BJ4QFjAAegQIBRAB&usg=AOvVaw1PXJ6NGdHGZOgq708HdAlj
 

gangzoom

Well-known Member
Ahh I get it. If you can afford 2 cars then the chances are you can afford a driveway. So only rich people have EVs. I see it now. All along your just a class snob
I have no issues with people been able to afford things, having not been born in the UK I also find the UK obsession with 'class' odd.

Data is what I enjoy looking at, and on average UK families own 1.3 cars per household, if you correct for the ones without a car your see a large proportion of the UK population has 2 cars, at least 42% in some parts of the UK.

The simple fact is addressing the issue of domestic EV charging really isn't hard, for 60-70% of households all it will take is afew hours of electrical work. The rest will take time and legislation, but quite achievable IF the government really wants to drive it with policy.

Cars per household England 2014-2017 | UK Statistics
 
Last edited:

Delvey

Distinguished Member
You don't seem to understand how the concept of data sampling and confidence intervals.

Surveying 100% of any population is impossible and unnecessary. You have to understand and correct for bias but sampling a small proportion of a population to gather a bigger picture is corner stone of modern day data analysis.

Here is another government document showing the same data but more recent.

70% of properties in the UK has either a garage or off road parking, with the majority of the rest having 'adequate' street side parking.

Don't confuse your situation with lack of parking with the bigger picture.

As for London you can argue why would you need a car with so many buses and trains serving the centre? My parents live in London their car had done 18k in 10 years!!

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6748/2173483.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjgyJmW8N7iAhWoSRUIHSO9BJ4QFjAAegQIBRAB&usg=AOvVaw1PXJ6NGdHGZOgq708HdAlj
But it depends where the sample is carried out.
Cornwall, then a lot of people have a drive.
Oxford, a lot of people have a drive.
The majority of city centres. Nobody has a drive. Even the outskirts of Manchester, a small percentage have a drive. And if you love looking at data then you know that data can be manipulated to suit, and a small sample size will never compare to the majority.

I still stand by my statement. For the majority of people, at the moment, an EV is a no go.
In 5 years, who knows? Ideally we would have local councils fitting charging points along every street, with cheap charging. But considering this country has no cash, and the majority of councils are running in the red, I cannot see this happening (and this is what needs to happen).
 

Navvie

Active Member
Just a small factual correction with no inference of opinion. That figure you quoted appears to be from the EEA and not the EU as the tables suggest they include countries such as Turkey.
Apologies for the late reply/quote, I haven't read all 8 pages of this thread yet. Again, without any inference of opinion.

On the link provided : Greenhouse gas emissions from transport

The EEA refers to the European Environment Agency, not the European Economic Area and to quote from the page.
  • In 2016, the transport sector contributed 27 % of total EU-28 greenhouse gas emissions. The figure decreases to 20 % if international aviation and maritime emissions are excluded.
The EU 28 does not include Turkey. This is a list of the EU28 the EEA refers to.

Countries | European Union
 

Delvey

Distinguished Member
So even with industrial levels of safety monitoring and small number of installations hydrogen fuel stations are going POP!!

Imagine how safe a hydrogen fuel station will be when rolled our enmass with running/safety been palmed off to the lowest bidder!!

Hydrogen station explodes, Toyota halts sales of fuel cell cars, is this the end? - Electrek
So it was definitely nothing to do with human error? Nothing to do with faulty installation? Can you give your expert opnion on hydrogen fuel cells and tell us exactly what caused the explosion?
You have jumped to a conclusion straight away. It could have been an idiot smoking nearby for all we know.

Ironically, this post goes against everything you have been saying about hydrogen (that it is dead in the water, even though Toyota have pumped billions into it,and that the infrastructure isn't available, which it is).
I still stand by my point, that we will have an alternative to battery power for vehicles in the future. It may or not be hydrogen, but batteries just simply cannot be used for large Van's, HGVs etc.

P.S I do not expect you to answer any of my points above, like you have not answered any of my other points mentioned on this thread.
But I will take your word for it for now. We will have battery powered planes, ships and HGVs in the near future:laugh:
 

LV426

Administrator
Staff member
.......batteries just simply cannot be used for large Van's, HGVs etc.
I'd qualify that, I'd suggest, that it is a statement only as regards the present state of battery technology. Or to limit it to the imminent future. It's not all that long ago that NiCd was the "state of the art" in portable rechargeable battery chemistry, with its attendant (relatively) large mass/low capacity and memory effects etc. It seems highly probable (to me), such is the nature of things, that we will advance beyond where Li-Ion stands to a point where capacity/density does indeed allow such things.
 

outoftheknow

Well-known Member
So even with industrial levels of safety monitoring and small number of installations hydrogen fuel stations are going POP!!

Imagine how safe a hydrogen fuel station will be when rolled our enmass with running/safety been palmed off to the lowest bidder!!

Hydrogen station explodes, Toyota halts sales of fuel cell cars, is this the end? - Electrek
Honestly I would read the whole article and extract the facts before believing the headline. The author provides their view at the end so you can see where the slant comes from in the writing. Toyota temporarily halted sales since the vehicles can’t refuel. Owners of current cars have been offered loan non hydrogen vehicles. The station owners have no idea of the cause so they have closes all 10 while they find out what happened. It doesn’t seem like a hydrogen car was refuelling.

The only other seller of hydrogen cars in the country echoed the announcements of Toyota.

Toyota provided a clear statement that this didn’t change their views on hydrogen.

“Is this the end?” Hardly IMHO.
 

IronGiant

Moderator
And of course "Gas" stations are perfectly safe
 

Greg Hook

Moderator & Reviewer
I still stand by my point, that we will have an alternative to battery power for vehicles in the future. It may or not be hydrogen, but batteries just simply cannot be used for large Van's, HGVs etc.
Sorry, that's incorrect. Electric Commercial Vehicles are very much in production right now.
From light vans right up to 26ton+ trucks. The new Mercedes Actros for example has an electric version.

An electric version of the Fuso 7.5t Canter has been available for about 4 years now.
 

Delvey

Distinguished Member
Not stopped people using petrol stations either
Sorry, that's incorrect. Electric Commercial Vehicles are very much in production right now.
From light vans right up to 26ton+ trucks. The new Mercedes Actros for example has an electric version.

An electric version of the Fuso 7.5t Canter has been available for about 4 years now.
You are correct, but I am as well
None of these vehicles have the range of the current ICE equivalent. How many of these 26 ton+ trucks can match the range of an ICE equivalent? None. How fast do they take to charge? A long time. How many service stations have charging stations for these vehicles? Not many.
In the freight business, time is money, so having to charge a vehicle every 150 miles for 2 hours is not economically viable. Yes, they are being used for shorter ranges, but now, and in the future, batteries will not replace ICE in large 40 ton+ trucks until the battery weight significantly drops
 

Greg Hook

Moderator & Reviewer
Not stopped people using petrol stations either

You are correct, but I am as well
None of these vehicles have the range of the current ICE equivalent. How many of these 26 ton+ trucks can match the range of an ICE equivalent? None. How fast do they take to charge? A long time. How many service stations have charging stations for these vehicles? Not many.
In the freight business, time is money, so having to charge a vehicle every 150 miles for 2 hours is not economically viable. Yes, they are being used for shorter ranges, but now, and in the future, batteries will not replace ICE in large 40 ton+ trucks until the battery weight significantly drops
Of course, but then no electric car has the range of a ICE car.
The eActros is in production for 2021 release with a range of 200km. Obviously not practical for long haul, but short range distribution it should be ok.
 

neilball

Well-known Member
Honestly I would read the whole article and extract the facts before believing the headline. The author provides their view at the end so you can see where the slant comes from in the writing. Toyota temporarily halted sales since the vehicles can’t refuel. Owners of current cars have been offered loan non hydrogen vehicles. The station owners have no idea of the cause so they have closes all 10 while they find out what happened. It doesn’t seem like a hydrogen car was refuelling.

The only other seller of hydrogen cars in the country echoed the announcements of Toyota.

Toyota provided a clear statement that this didn’t change their views on hydrogen.

“Is this the end?” Hardly IMHO.
News reports from Norway stated the fuel station was not in use at the time of the explosion and the only minor injuries were from passing motorists who had their airbags set off by the blast wave.

There have also been recent supply issues in California due to an explosion at a chemical plant producing H2 for vehicle fuel stations. Honda, Toyota and Hyundai were having to offer ICE loan cars here too for affected customers until fuelling stations could be brought back on line.

In this case it’s cause was reported as leakage during the transfer of H2 from storage into a road tanker. There are also quotes from the fire department about the challenge of fighting a fire that burns with a invisible flame (to the naked eye), and needing thermal imaging cameras to “see” the fire.
 

gangzoom

Well-known Member
And of course "Gas" stations are perfectly safe
What I don't get is why you wouldnt see EVs as an opportunity to move away from the reliance on an entire third party company to keep you mobile.

Any hydrogen fuel cell car owner is at the mercy of Shell/BP to continue and maintain supply of the fuel. And when it goes wrong, for what ever reason your stuffed.

Sure that's what your use to with petrol cars but EVs are a different ball game.

Hydrogen supply pinch affects San Francisco fuel-cell drivers

But with an EV your supply your own fuel 95% of the time, and as long as you have electricity your be able to fuel your car. Yes the grid can go down, but no petrol/hydrogen fuel station will operate in the event of gird failure.

Even EV Rapidcharging is so much easier to implement and maintain than liquid hydrogen compressed to crazy pressures.

Why governments/companies are still wasting their time and money on this tech is beyond my understanding.
 

gangzoom

Well-known Member
The whole push of hydrogen is been led by the petrol companies, and their desire to ensure they remain indispensable.

The fact one burning oil tanker can still cause so much chaos shows how addicted to hydrocarbons we all are.

In a time when wind/solar can already produce so much electricity with the potential to disrupt/break the power the hydrocarbon lobby has both monetary and politically I really don't understand the wish to continue with the status quo with hydrogen as a fuel instead of petrol/diesel.

Even looking at our very small PV setup - 4KW, with less than ideal facing, the panel generated 6569kWh over 2 years, in the same time period INCLUDING home EV charging we used 11,398 kWh.

So if we double our solar PV setup to 8WK or even better 10KW we could end up with a situation where we generate more electricity than consume, even including EV transportation, and all simply from a domestic PV setup.

Surely is this the kind of thing we should be asking our governments to do, not continuing to cozy up to the likes of BP/Shell.
 

Delvey

Distinguished Member
What I don't get is why you wouldnt see EVs as an opportunity to move away from the reliance on an entire third party company to keep you mobile.

Any hydrogen fuel cell car owner is at the mercy of Shell/BP to continue and maintain supply of the fuel. And when it goes wrong, for what ever reason your stuffed.

Sure that's what your use to with petrol cars but EVs are a different ball game.

Hydrogen supply pinch affects San Francisco fuel-cell drivers

But with an EV your supply your own fuel 95% of the time, and as long as you have electricity your be able to fuel your car. Yes the grid can go down, but no petrol/hydrogen fuel station will operate in the event of gird failure.

Even EV Rapidcharging is so much easier to implement and maintain than liquid hydrogen compressed to crazy pressures.

Why governments/companies are still wasting their time and money on this tech is beyond my understanding.
I did not realise you had your own solar/wind farm that provides the electricity needed to charge your Tesla :rotfl:

I agree with the rest, however, even with an EV you are still dependent on a third party company to provide the energy needed.

Companies are spending the money on research on Hydrogen as they believe it is the fuel of the future, and I imagine they would not spend billions on such unless they had some kind of evidence to support that, regardless of your own personal feelings on the matter.
 

Delvey

Distinguished Member
The whole push of hydrogen is been led by the petrol companies, and their desire to ensure they remain indispensable.

The fact one burning oil tanker can still cause so much chaos shows how addicted to hydrocarbons we all are.

In a time when wind/solar can already produce so much electricity with the potential to disrupt/break the power the hydrocarbon lobby has both monetary and politically I really don't understand the wish to continue with the status quo with hydrogen as a fuel instead of petrol/diesel.

Even looking at our very small PV setup - 4KW, with less than ideal facing, the panel generated 6569kWh over 2 years, in the same time period INCLUDING home EV charging we used 11,398 kWh.

So if we double our solar PV setup to 8WK or even better 10KW we could end up with a situation where we generate more electricity than consume, even including EV transportation, and all simply from a domestic PV setup.

Surely is this the kind of thing we should be asking our governments to do, not continuing to cozy up to the likes of BP/Shell.
The biggest investor in Hydrogen at the moment is Toyota, so not a petrol company.

And whilst EVs are great in this country, not every country in the world has a reliable electricity source, or an abundant electricity supply (even the UK imports a lot of electricity, and therefore the capacity in this country reaches its maximum production).
Take China for example, which many car manufacturers are targeting for EVs. They still produce over 50% off their electricity with coal. The same in India (I chose these two countries as they have the largest populations).
Yes great, everyone who can afford a car is driving an EV in these two countries, but the electricity being provided for these EVs is coming from the most pollutant form of producing electricity.

It is all well and good that you can produce 4kW from your solar panels, but Toyota/Shell/BP et el are not thinking about you and your renewable energy, they are thinking of how the future of cars are going to be powered globally.

This is something you have failed to grasp in this thread. What works for you, with your Tesla, and your driveway and solar panels, is very unlikely to work for 99.99999999% of the population of this planet.
 

gangzoom

Well-known Member
This is something you have failed to grasp in this thread. What works for you, with your Tesla, and your driveway and solar panels, is very unlikely to work for 99.99999999% of the population of this planet.
Its actually the opposites because EVs don't work for you currently you cannot see the potential.

If you have to India or China your know how vast swades of these countries have access much more sun we have in the UK.

I go to Patna on a regular basis, power cuts are so often most houses have their own battery supply to keep lights on during a power cut. It really doesn't take alot of imagination to see how solar PVs on each building could make the electric supply much more stable and life easier for people.

Most people in India/China also don't drive 100 miles, all they want to do is get to/from work, which is usually 10-20 miles at the most. This is why electric scooters are every where in China.

The same for people in Africa, big power stations or fuel cell cars require massive infrastructure costs. Where as solar PV + wind for local electricity generation will give billions of people more access to electricity and give them control.

Far from been restrictive, EVs + local electricity generation can give mobility to people who have never had it before.

Your right about Shell/BP not caring about local electricity generation, because that essentially destroys their bussiness model....I personally look fowards to the day when big oil cannot hold countries and politicians to ransom.
 
Last edited:

IronGiant

Moderator
This is something you have failed to grasp in this thread. What works for you, with your Tesla, and your driveway and solar panels, is very unlikely to work for 99.99999999% of the population of this planet.
Don't exaggerate, there are currently (end of 2018) 5 million EV's on the planet, so it's only 99.93421052‬% ;)
 

Delvey

Distinguished Member
Its actually the opposites because EVs don't work for you currently you cannot see the potential.
The only reason EVs will not work for me at present is the lack of anywhere to charge. This may change with my new job, as they have a Renault garage less than half a mile away, and I am just waiting on the new Zoe announcement due today. I agree with you, in that the government should be looking at looking at ways to rectify this.
If you have to India or China your know how vast swades of these countries have access much more sun we have in the UK.
Yet burn so much coal to produce electricity. Driving an EV that has been charged up by coal power kind of negates its green credentials
I go to Patna on a regular basis, power cuts are so often most houses have their own battery supply to keep lights on during a power cut. It really doesn't take alot of imagination to see how solar PVs on each building could make the electric supply much more stable and life easier for people.
Powering a light is different to powering a car. Interestingly however, the BBC had an article about an island in the Atlantic that was looking at using EVs to store electricity during the day (as most of their power comes from solar and wind) to be used at night
How an electric car can make money
 

outoftheknow

Well-known Member
Its actually the opposites because EVs don't work for you currently you cannot see the potential.
TBF it could be observed that EVs work for you so you can’t see the potential of other power sources like hydrogen :)

Honestly I can’t see how it can be argued that power sources other than EVs rely on a single source for something. EV batteries are made by one company mostly. Electricity comes from al sorts of things around the world and is till a lot of hydrocarbon. Saying wind and solar doesn’t need massive infrastructure is pushing it a bit.

The biggest investor in hydrogen at the moment is probably the Japanese government. They are aiming for fuel cell power stations as part of their hydrogen economy. They aren’t just concentrating on vehicles.

It isn’t about which is better now. It is about how we need a variety of ways to power machinery of all sizes and to produce electricity in the future.

I have worked with and around engines up to 70,000 shaft horsepower (ships) all my career and fuel has been and is hydrocarbon based. Actually engines are available up to 108,000 shaft horse power (80,000 kW) but they haven’t had many buyers.

We had steam from boilers burning coal, then burning fuel oil. Steam engines, turbines or reciprocating. Fuel oil injection (all diesel cycle), direct, common rail both been around a long time. Diesel engines dual fuel - fuel oil and methane gas (LNG) with diesel pilot ignition and without. Compressed natural gas (liquid methane). Methanol/ethanol. And now they are working on fuel cells - methane is the front runner as fuel but any hydrocarbon can be used (the reformer gets trickier to extract the hydrogen but it’s doable mostly). This is using hydrocarbons not dwindling as fast as ones like diesel. Hydrogen is very much on the cards to power these large fuel cells too.

A ship burns 5 to 70 tonnes of diesel a day. LNG uses about 30% more fuel for the same power. Batteries are a long, long way from fixing the many issues of the future in the parts of industry that use huge amounts of fuel oils. Fuel cells will be “next” for the powers involved.

Cars are heading EV at the moment more than fuel cell. No matter how much the supporters of each put the other technology down, they are both on their separate paths to be part of the future. Each technology will suit different applications and probably one more than the other in some applications - but I can’t see cars being EV or nothing.
 

Trending threads

Latest news

Google Home update leaves smart speakers dumb
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
LG Display posts Q3 losses of $377 million
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Netflix reveals how viewing metrics determines a show's success
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Discovery launches dplay AVOD service in UK and Ireland
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Cyrus announces ONE Cast Smart Audio System
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published

Latest threads

Top Bottom