New Honda Solar Power Hydrogen Station Debuts (2010)

[nationalize the fed]

4. that phys.org article is dated 12/11/2006

Do you think anything related to costs has changed in 7 1/2 years?

A poster from the comment section makes some good points:

apocryphal_doom writes:
This article makes some very questionable assumptions in its analysis.

1) All of the energy used to electrolyze water must come from electricity generated on the grid, and electrolysis is the way all hydrogen will be produced.

False. The majority probably will, but chemicals like titanium dioxide reduce that energy when exposed to sunlight, a technology which is being patented as I type. Furthermore, electrolysis is not required for all methods of hydrogen generation, though the remainder generate carbon dioxide. The article claims Mr. Bossel evaluated many ways of producing hydrogen, but I don't see any evidence of this in his other remarks. And last, hydrogen can be generated with solar cells on site.

2) Hydrogen must be transported long distances in pipes to its destination refuel station.

Hydrogen is being generated onsite by electrolysis in Iceland. The only things we need to generate hydrogen are electricity, water, and possibly organic compounds, all of which are easily shipped with today's infrastructure.

3) Hydrogen must be stored as a compressed gas or liquid.

This is the least likely method of easy hydrogen storage in the future, although it's what we use today. Hydrogen will likely be stored bonded to metals, carbon nanostructures, or ammonia borane, which is easy since it is such a small atom that it takes almost no room in bonded form. The only trouble is getting it to bond and unbond at will, but this is much closer today than in the past. (Dead link)

Here is an updated explanation of hydrogen storage via metals-from 2013:

4) People will wait hours to recharge their pure electric car or external, replaceable battery packs will become commonplace.

Yeah, and the world is flat. And if you believe that, I've got some magic beans to sell you.

If a fraction of the money spent on the last 13 years of war, or some of the billions that subsidize nuclear energy was spent on finding new ways of performing electrolysis and hydrogen tech do you think there would be even more spectacular advances?

Even without much help from subsidies, huge cost reductions have been accomplished, both in hydrogen storage and particularly solar panels.

Here is a detailed explanation by someone who, in 2008, built a solar hydrogen house that was detailed in Scientific American
Inside the solar hydrogen house: No More Power Bills-Ever:

For a breakdown comparison of the "wind to wheels" efficiency of H2 vs battery electric see:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1127&pid=68545

Is that from 2006 as well?

An updated study by energy.gov compares greenhouse gas emissions of hydrogen cars vs. battery only EV's:



energy.gov: Hydrogen Fuel Cell cars beat out BEV's in well to wheel greenhouse gas emissions. (Grams of CO2-equivalent per mile) (PDF)
http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/10001_well_to_wheels_gge_petroleum_use.pdf


Figure 2: Driving range as a function of energy storage
http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/will_the_fuel_cell_have_a_second_life

See also: Hydrogen versus Battery Power
Dr. Robert E. Buxbaum
http://www.rebresearch.com/blog/hydrogen-versus-battery-power/


Some other points:

The batteries on a battery only EV will sooner or later have to be replaced. On a tesla, it can be as much as $40,000 (and don't let them fully discharge). What happens to the spent batteries?

Battery EV's lose up to 57% of their range in cold weather. Fuel cell cars don't share that problem http://cars.chicagotribune.com/fuel-efficient/news/chi-electric-vehicles-lose-range-in-cold

In 2014, data shows that Hydrogen fuel cell cars are far superior to battery only electrics. Unless you're Elon Musk.

From 2009:
4. Summary Comparison of Batteries and Fuel Cells

The advantages of the fuel cell EV are dominant if
the battery EV must have 480 km (300 miles)
range to serve as a fully functional all-purpose
passenger vehicle, but the fuel cell EV also has
many superior attributes for EVs with only 320 km
(200 miles) range as summarized in Table 3.
These advantages are also plotted in Figure 19 as
the ratio of the battery EV value to the fuel cell EV
value for each attribute.

These advantages explain why most major
automobile companies dropped their long-range
battery all-electric vehicle developments in the
1990’s and devoted most of their efforts to the fuel
cell EV. While the car companies are now
considering plug-in hybrids that require far less
stringent battery characteristics than the all-electric
EV, and while some car companies are developing
short range battery-powered city cars for niche
markets, the underlying benefits of the fuel cell
have not changed.
http://cleancaroptions.com/C.E._Thomas_Battery_vs_Fuel_Cell_EVs_Paper_for_Distribution.pdf

More comparisons:
http://cleancaroptions.com/