Thread: The real experience of a Tesla SUV

Originally Posted by Ancient Mariner

Isn't Hydrogen produced by coal aka electricity?

AM

Hydrogen is produced by, amongst other ways, running an electrical current through water.
Time for that photo you have Mr bee utey.

Originally Posted by Simon

So who is going to be first to try a defender to electric conversion.............

I read that LR already has battery systems likely to be offered in the next Defender and other LRs and Jags.

Originally Posted by bee utey

Full electric cars have a longer history than petrol cars, their biggest killer was Henry's Model T. A short history of electric cars I found:

Electric Car History (In Depth)



Attachment 124945

Sure. And while we're at it. let's not forget the Stanley Steamer, another futuristic enterprise, which also preceded Ford.



22 years, the company lasted. More, I predict, than Tesla will. No subsidies, remember, unlike Tesla.

Tesla Model S - Battery Swap HD Official - YouTube
Tesla battery swap.

Originally Posted by Mick_Marsh

Hydrogen is produced by, amongst other ways, running an electrical current through water.
Time for that photo you have Mr bee utey.

Obscure as always, Mr Marsh.

.........................................

Anyway, hydrogen is currently sourced predominately from natural gas, so using NG as supplied is probably more efficient. Hydrogen can be sourced by electrolysis of water, the issue there is that the process isn't very efficient and unless electricity is very cheap, not cost competitive. There is some talk about using excess wind and solar power to produce hydrogen, when the grid can't handle an excess of it. The hydrogen can be stored within existing NG infrastructure for later burning or stored at high pressure for refuelling vehicles. It is very difficult to get meaningful amounts of hydrogen into a vehicle tank, so batteries are not outclassed yet. Hydrogen can be more cheaply transported in the form of liquid ammonia and that could be a way of exporting excess solar energy to industrial users all over the world.

Originally Posted by johntins

Sure. And while we're at it. let's not forget the Stanley Steamer, another futuristic enterprise, which also preceded Ford.

22 years, the company lasted. More, I predict, than Tesla will. No subsidies, remember, unlike Tesla.

No idea if Tesla as a vehicle manufacturer will survive but battery electric cars are being developed by most major vehicle manufacturers so the result is academic. The battery vs hydrogen war reminds me of the Betamax vs VHS battle, there was only one winner and that had little to do with quality, just whoever got the most machines on the market. The near future isn't looking too rosy for hydrogen cars.

Toyota is planning long-range battery-powered electric cars for 2020 as its hydrogen fuel cells cars are failing | Electrek

Originally Posted by Mick_Marsh

Hydrogen is produced by, amongst other ways, running an electrical current through water.
Time for that photo you have Mr bee utey.

Far better use for electricity than the manufacturing, all of it, and then the charging and recharging batteries which still need to be disposed of, using more electricity.

I think people need to decide: Do you support electric cars because of their so called environmental qualities, or do you support them for the school run cachet they seem to offer?

The first is spurious at best, unless you are prepared to ignore the massive environmental damage caused by the battery lifecycle, and the fact that nearly all of Tesla recharging will be by electricity supplied from fossil fuel. NIMBY syndrome writ large. The second will be very shortlived, as all 'fashions' are.

Originally Posted by johntins

.....

A proper, efficient, clean alternative already exists. .......

Not saying hydrogen cells are perfect, not by a long way. But they are far closer to it than battery tech.

Hydrogen fuel cells may be performing quite well, but the same cannot be said for the rest of the necessary ecosystem for their widespread use.

Hydrogen (as in a transport fuel) is not a source of energy, it is a means of storing energy. Its terrestrial abundance is irrelevant, and the existence of effective fuel cells is almost as irrelevant!

Hydrogen is expensive, difficult, bulky, and dangerous to store or transport, making it rather impractical to envisage a widespread distribution (or use) of it as there is with petrol, diesel and LPG (and grid power!) today. Transforming a primary energy source such as coal, oil, or gas or even solar or wind energy into hydrogen, distributing it, and then to electrical and then to mechanical energy to use it for transport is no more efficient than the internal combustion cycle, perhaps less so. (You could use the electricity grid to produce hydrogen locally, but it seems to me unlikely that this could ever come close to the energy efficiency of even the current EVs. Batteries as they exist today, are surprisingly energy efficient as a method of storing and transporting energy - they are just expensive, bulky and heavy.)

While there are undoubtedly issues with electric vehicles, I have difficulty seeing hydrogen ever becoming a major transport fuel. While it shares the advantage of being pollution free at the point of use with EVs, the electric vehicles already have a distribution network ready made (called "the grid") with only specialised local connections needing to be installed.