I can't wait till Toyota pulls their fingers out and makes EV.
I'm sure Toyota's FCV technology will be especially useful for their commercial vehicles, CUV's and SUV's etc.

 

Its also about trying what is out there. For 50 bucks (or less, right now I have a reservation at LAX for $20) a day, I can get myself something near luxury, like an impala or avalon, something I haven't driven before. Im so bored with my own cars. To me, its a win win to use someone else's car and not have to care about door dings, passenger cleanliness, etc.

Back to EVs, I believe that when Toyota debuted the plug in prius with only 13 miles of electric range, they stated some statistic (can't quite remember exactly) of how many % of people that would be enough to commute to work. It was a high %, around 80. If 13 miles is enough, then 215 miles must satisfy the needs of what we would consider "mainstream" For the 5 days out of 365, Im sure people will find some other way of getting around.

 

Thinking outside the box on range anxiety / limitations, with more and more people leasing cars or just not wanting to own, renting an ev will be the way to go for long trips. Running low on charge? No issue, pull into the nearest rental place and swap out the vehicle for a charged one. Instant, done. Alternatively, a 'swappable' battery pack could make for an almost instant recharge too. Heck, maybe even bring an extra battery pack along if you don't need all the seating space. Yes, there's some efficiency loss in lugging the extra battery using charge from the built in one, but if the car then can go 500 miles, it will be a hit.

There's many possible models...

Seems to me in 25 years we'll consider fossil fuel cars to be like steam trains.

 

^^ didn't tesla unveil a system a few years ago to swap out the battery back in only a few minutes? There is a video of that somewhere

 

it's a chicken and egg argument. neither side will suddenly be everywhere one day. it's going to be gradual growth on each side step by step.

a lot of people want good gas mileage throughout the year on their daily driving. on the annual ski or mountain trip they rent a capable suv or bigger car for it. it makes a lot of sense to most people. i personally think it's stupid to have a big heavy suv that gets 12mpg so one can make the annual trip with people comfortable in the car, while suffering gas cost for the remaining 340 days of the year.

same reason why i don't have a truck. if it comes the day i have to move stuff? either i just pay for delivery or i rent a truck.

the logic is the same, you might not see it for your specific case but it's the same logic

 

Except for the fact that you have to unload one EV and reload the charged one.Not to mention all of your stuff you just carry with you in your car that you may want, umbrellas, phone chargers, etc etc.

When we travel as a family we are packed full. Would never even consider unpacking and repacking once or more times during a trip...

You need to be able to charge an EV in less than 5-10 minutes, and you need to be able to do that anywhere in the US for them to be viable to take on a trip. Yes Tesla is building stations where you can swap out battery packs quickly for a charge similar to a full tank of gas in about the same time as filling your tank, BUT, again you need to be able to do that. When I get off 64 and get on US 60 in Sam Black Church, WV I need to be able to replace the battery pack in my Tesla like I normally would refuel. Thats nowhere near happening. Yeah...I can do it up and down 95 maybe...

And again...what do I do while I'm there?

Yeah with planning perhaps you can "make it work", but why? A well equipped Tesla is $20-30,000 more than my LS and it costs me $50 to fill my LS from empty right now...and its still a nicer car when you take away whats unique about the Tesla. So I'm paying considerably more for a car that isn't as nice to be in, and that can't fill all of my needs. Thats not purchase decision a mainstream buyer is going to make anytime soon.

THATS why mainstream EVs like the Leaf haven't done well.

 

Nissan sells a ton of those Leafs in Europe, even though their battery packs only last for 80 miles. It's easier to travel and charge when cities are close to each other, fast chargers are available at rest stops and destinations aren't that far. It's a lot harder to do in countries like the US and Australia with urban areas far apart. EVs haven't taken off in China, where the western part of the country is almost empty and large cities can be hours apart, although I've seen lots of Teslas in the major coastal cities.

 

The now defunct Better Place had some pretty good battery swapping tech.


Advantage for them was they they only had a single battery size. Having to keep a bunch of 60/70/90/100kwh batteries in multiple places around the country would be super capital intensive. Given the numbers Tesla wants to sell at it's just not a reasonable solution (unless they charge some crazy amount for it)

 

good point. i keep any stuff in my car in bags so i can take everything out in seconds if need be.

i know we're not there today, but i'm looking down the road (ha).

what do you normally do when you get gas?

agreed not any time soon... i do wish the u.s. would also use more of its VAST natural gas supply for cars too. fortunately it is at least happening for municipal and commercial vehicles pretty widely now.

 

I think battery swaps are too expensive, while swappable cars are even more expensive.

As it stands, we presently have both full electric vehicles, and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles acting in unison.

As a precursor, EV requires a power station, be that solar, wind, wave, hydraulic, geothermal, or nuclear.
EV also requires cable transmission of electrical power to home, business etc.

As a precursor, FCV requires a power station too, be that solar, wind, wave, hydraulic, geothermal, or nuclear etc.
FCV also requires a hydrogen plant to split water into hydrogen gas, and oxygen.
Storage is also required.
Transport trucks and roadways required.
Then the gas station must have hydrogen gas storage facilities.

EV is just a big battery and electric motors.
FCV is a hydrogen storage tank, hydrogen power generator, small battery, and electric motors.

The infrastructure for hydrogen FCV is already in existence California etc, but it will take considerably longer for hydrogen to become widespread and mainstream than creating simple Super Charged electric power stations.

The EV's have a performance advantage because the electricity is already there under storage.
The hydrogen fuel cells have less performance, because the generator must combine hydrogen with oxygen to release energy and this takes time, hence the Toyota Mirai's 0-60 in 9 seconds, but then the FCV is quicker to mechanically refuel, and has considerably denser energy storage in the fuel tank for much longer travel range.

It's a good thing that most people, especially non-commercial, don't travel long distances, and don't do so very often.
FCV is especially suited to long range day to day commercial applications.
.

 

Would having a more powerful generator decrease the time to release energy, thus improving 0-60?

 

Have we ever noticed how our traditional cordless power tools, eg cordless drills were either the very old NiCads, or the current generation Lions, but very rarely do we come across NiMH powered power tools?
That's because Lions have the quickest discharge rate, while the NiCads have the second quickest discharge rates, meanwhile the NiMH's maximum discharge rate is the slowest.
This is one reason why the 2nd gen GS450h is slightly slower than the 1st gen GS450h.
Although NiMH is more energy dense than the old NiCads, NiMH has a slower maximum discharge rate.

Thus, the easiest way for the Mirai to improve 0-60 is just by changing the chemistry of the battery to lithium ion for a faster maximum discharge rate, plus using a bigger battery, and allowing that battery discharge quickly.
But then like you say, we'd need a bigger hydrogen fuel cell generator to recharge the battery quickly, otherwise the Mirai's full throttle acceleration would have to be electronically "capped" to allow the battery to recharge in time for the next burst in acceleration.

At the extreme, size for size, a battery will always release energy more quickly than a hydrogen fuel cell can generate electricity.

For example, our muscle cells have a storage of ATP and ADP for muscle contraction, which is released for a 100 meter sprint in under 10 seconds.
It takes a while for our muscle cells to form the ATP and ADP, but Usain Bolt's muscle cells burn the ATP and ADP storage up very quickly during sprinting.
Sprinters have more "fast twitch" muscle fibers, and fast twitch muscle fibers have a larger storage of ATP and ADP fuel - like a bigger battery in a hybrid, FCV or EV...
.

 

Very informative post

I thought the 2nd GSh was marginally slower because they switched from Otto to an Atkinson cycle? The trade off being less power for more efficiency?

 

True, the 2nd GSh mainly slightly slower due to intentional design for greater fuel economy.

This EV vs FCV debate is a little like traditional gasoline vs diesel.

Diesel has more energy density than gasoline such that diesel has more torque, and greater fuel economy - great for big heavy commercial vehicles, and great for longer range travel.

However, because diesel has a lower octane [higher cetane] rating, diesel spontaneously ignites, such that we cannot control spontaneous combustion at high RPM, hence diesels have a limited red line and poor maximum power for 0-60 and general racing.

Diesel is superior for commercial applications, and it is very possible that hydrogen FCV will be much better suited to commercial applications.

 

They quietly stopped hyping that up after short trial where nothing seemed to be happening.