HYDROGEN cars are here ! - Hyundai

[Gweiloman]

2 hours ago, seedy said:

So ... it is NOT 'Free'

 

am·or·tize

verb

past tense: amortised; past participle: amortised

1. gradually write off the initial cost of (an asset) over a period.

   "they want to amortize the tooling costs quickly"

   • reduce or pay off (a debt) with regular payments.

     "loan fees can be amortized over the life of the mortgage"

As a qualified accountant, I do know the meaning of amortisation and depreciation (they are technically different) but thanks for the definition. 
 

The cost of my solar installation and it’s subsequent amortisation has been calculated into that part of my household budget which does not include car maintenance. But now, all of a sudden, I’m able to reduce my fuel costs, thanks to an asset which does not cost me any additional money. So as far as I’m concerned, it’s free.

 

Not a problem for me if you insist it’s not free.

[Bandersnatch]

The hydrogen fuel cell Toyota Mirai enters Thailand this November

 

The Mirai is expected to be launched in Thailand at a price of between 2-2.3 million baht

 

There currently aren't any Hydrogen filling station in Thailand

 

 

 

 

Source (Thai): https://www.springnews.co.th/digital-tech/auto/831368

 

 

 

 

 

[Gweiloman]

3 hours ago, Bandersnatch said:

The hydrogen fuel cell Toyota Mirai enters Thailand this NovembeR

 

There currently aren't any Hydrogen filling station in Thailand

 

 

Oh dear, that’s a bit of a problem isn’t it?

Edited October 29, 2022 by Gweiloman

[VocalNeal]

On 10/27/2022 at 7:06 AM, Boomer6969 said:

Agree totally, Hybrid is just expensive nonsense, ineffective with regards to carbon footprint.

..and Hyundai only sells vans ands SUV .. HERE ????

Edited October 29, 2022 by VocalNeal

[Gweiloman]

6 minutes ago, VocalNeal said:

..and Hyundai only sells vans ands SUV .. HERE ????

Can’t understand Hyundai’s thinking. The Ioniq 5 is sold in Malaysia, even though the charging infrastructure is nowhere as good as it is in Thailand.

 

Having said that, demand far outstrips supply which proves that lack of a charging network is not a hurdle to owning EVs.

[richard_smith237]

22 hours ago, Gweiloman said:

360kWh per household would be a lot if every household had an EV (of course this would be offset by free sunlight but that’s another discussion). Of course not everyone in the foreseeable future will have an EV. But if you read carefully what I wrote, I said it would only be a fraction of overall consumption. Businesses and factories consume a huge amount. So imo, EV charging will only be a fraction of overall consumption and will not affect the price of electricity in any significant manner.

The UK has claimed it will stop the sale of ICE vehicles from 2030... thus, soon after the vast majority of households will have EV’s charging from their property. 

 

The calculations I used were for 1 EV charging per-household. 

The reality is that most households have more than one car, thus the assumption could be that the domestic draw will be greater than a 36% increase, perhaps as high as 50%. 

 

Will these vehicles also be charged at businesses ??...  perhaps reducing the household draw but increasing the electrical demand at the point of business. 

 

The discussion on efficiency and electricity demand aside; the UK government currently makes huge amounts of tax from the the petrol we put in our cars - in 2016 approximately 70% of the cost of petrol at the pump was tax made by the government. In 2022 that amount is approximately 50%. 

 

The government will want their money some way.... Will the taxation systems change ? will it shift to ‘usage’ i.e. yearly road tax based on mileage ? or will they increase tax on electricity ?

 

 

I can’t see a future where driving cars will be cheeper than it is now because. Even if we do provide our own electricity with solar panels etc... Even if we have local community solar systems to moderate peak demand etc...   I don’t see the the government’s happily missing out on the huge amounts of tax they currently receive from petroleum. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Gweiloman]

4 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

The UK has claimed it will stop the sale of ICE vehicles from 2030... thus, soon after the vast majority of households will have EV’s charging from their property. 

 

The calculations I used were for 1 EV charging per-household. 

The reality is that most households have more than one car, thus the assumption could be that the domestic draw will be greater than a 36% increase, perhaps as high as 50%. 

 

Will these vehicles also be charged at businesses ??...  perhaps reducing the household draw but increasing the electrical demand at the point of business. 

 

The discussion on efficiency and electricity demand aside; the UK government currently makes huge amounts of tax from the the petrol we put in our cars - in 2016 approximately 70% of the cost of petrol at the pump was tax made by the government. In 2022 that amount is approximately 50%. 

 

The government will want their money some way.... Will the taxation systems change ? will it shift to ‘usage’ i.e. yearly road tax based on mileage ? or will they increase tax on electricity ?

 

 

I can’t see a future where driving cars will be cheeper than it is now because. Even if we do provide our own electricity with solar panels etc... Even if we have local community solar systems to moderate peak demand etc...   I don’t see the the government’s happily missing out on the huge amounts of tax they currently receive from petroleum. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The question of tax revenue is an interesting one. How will governments replace this revenue from petrol and diesel? I wonder how Norway is handling this. Their personal income tax rate is only a flat 22% (https://taxsummaries.pwc.com/norway/individual/taxes-on-personal-income).

 

Taxation system change is overly draconian; I doubt the population will accept this willingly. Increasing electricity rates are also unworkable.

 

A possible alternative is to increase the road tax for EVs. But most governments are doing the exact opposite.

 

Best way is to reduce spending. Cut military budgets to 0.1% of GDP. No one wants to invade UK or US; liabilities more than assets lol.

 

 

[richard_smith237]

20 minutes ago, Gweiloman said:

A possible alternative is to increase the road tax for EVs. But most governments are doing the exact opposite.

 

Agreed... at the moment they are encouraging people to switch to EV’s... 

 

IMO this is where the politics gets a little dirty... Once people have made the switch and are committed, it will be easy to increase the road tax on EV’s. 

 

The UK Government (and most of the EU) did the same decades ago with Diesel.

Road users were encouraged to switch to using diesel as conventional thinking at the time was that diesel was far more efficient....   tax on diesel fuel was cut, diesel fuel was cheaper until too many people made the switch, the government increased the tax on diesel again.... (this in the 80’s / 90’s and way before the NO2 concerns). 

 

It doesn’t matter what the type of vehicle it is - the reality is a two fold concern: 

a) The numbers of vehicles on the roads needs to be limited (cost is the only effective way to do this).

b) Tax on road use / cars is a major source of revenue for the governments.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

IMO - Hydrogen cars are the way forwards. 

 

The heavy and rare earth minerals and metals required for batteries are dirty - there is no environmentally friendly aspect of batteries.

 

Battery tech needs to increase significantly to the point that batteries are ‘clean’ and do not rely so heavily on these rare earth heavy minerals and metals. 

 

 

The hydrogen fuel cell is IMO the cleanest solution of them all - IF we truly care about clean energy our governments would be pushing this tech over electric. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Gweiloman]

3 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Agreed... at the moment they are encouraging people to switch to EV’s... 

 

IMO this is where the politics gets a little dirty... Once people have made the switch and are committed, it will be easy to increase the road tax on EV’s. 

 

The UK Government (and most of the EU) did the same decades ago with Diesel.

Road users were encouraged to switch to using diesel as conventional thinking at the time was that diesel was far more efficient....   tax on diesel fuel was cut, diesel fuel was cheaper until too many people made the switch, the government increased the tax on diesel again.... (this in the 80’s / 90’s and way before the NO2 concerns). 

 

It doesn’t matter what the type of vehicle it is - the reality is a two fold concern: 

a) The numbers of vehicles on the roads needs to be limited (cost is the only effective way to do this).

b) Tax on road use / cars is a major source of revenue for the governments.

 

 

 

 

 

 

In my opinion, governments should be promoting the use of plug-ins instead. This is a middle ground. Tax revenue will not take a nose dive, the electricity grid will have time to cope with growing demand and consumers need not worry about range anxiety lol.

[Gweiloman]

2 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

IMO - Hydrogen cars are the way forwards. 

 

The heavy and rare earth minerals and metals required for batteries are dirty - there is no environmentally friendly aspect of batteries.

 

Battery tech needs to increase significantly to the point that batteries are ‘clean’ and do not rely so heavily on these rare earth heavy minerals and metals. 

 

 

The hydrogen fuel cell is IMO the cleanest solution of them all - IF we truly care about clean energy our governments would be pushing this tech over electric. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Like I said in another post, maybe. But currently, lots of hurdles getting it mainstream. If it was profitable for both governments and manufacturers, I’m sure they would be pushing it much harder.

[seedy]

 

[kwilco]

On 10/27/2022 at 12:51 AM, KhunLA said:

Hydrogen cars ????

... not practical in our lifetime.

You must be very old then!

[KhunLA]

34 minutes ago, kwilco said:

You must be very old then!

I guess you missed this vid a few posts above:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QxbJY4hMYw&ab_channel=TheElectricViking

 

[kwilco]

5 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

I guess you missed this vid a few posts above:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QxbJY4hMYw&ab_channel=TheElectricViking

 

You're a one quote wonder! - you need to get informed.

[still kicking]

On 10/28/2022 at 12:23 PM, Gweiloman said:

I doubt it. EV charging will only ever be a tiny fraction of overall electricity consumption. Many households consume over 1,000 kWh per month.

Is that so, I live in the expensive west as you call it, just got over winter and I used 268 KW for the period of 61 days and no I don't have a heater but I cook on electricity and hot water is also from electric system and I have no solar because I am renting can you beat that?

[CharlieH]

Troll remark and response removed.

[Gweiloman]

3 hours ago, still kicking said:

Is that so, I live in the expensive west as you call it, just got over winter and I used 268 KW for the period of 61 days and no I don't have a heater but I cook on electricity and hot water is also from electric system and I have no solar because I am renting can you beat that?

I don’t remember when I said expensive west but I do think that the cost of living in the west is much more expensive than here in SEA.

I also didn’t realise winter is over. I always thought winter was around December, January. 
 

268 kWh over 61 days averages out to 4.4 kWh per day. How do you manage that? My base load alone is around 15kWh per day.

[placeholder]

On 10/27/2022 at 5:19 PM, seedy said:

It is not - only in the minds of the Faithful.

Pay 350,000 THB and get free electricity - what is wrong with this picture ?

And electric rates have already started to rise for EV charging around the world.

Think power companies are fools ? If there is a market they will profit from it.

Of course electric rates are rising at EV stations. Haven't you heard that there's been a stratospheric rise in the cost of the fossil fuels used to generate electricity? 

Edited October 30, 2022 by placeholder

[Gweiloman]

3 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Of course electric rates are rising at EV stations. Haven't you heard that there's been a stratospheric rise in the cost of the fossil fuels used to generate electricity? 

Any guesses as to what the per kWh rate might be in 6 months time?

[placeholder]

On 10/27/2022 at 5:23 PM, richard_smith237 said:

Agreed....   EV’s are no more environmentally friendly than the ICE vehicles...  Worse perhaps. 

 

But, they do move emissions from the built up area’s, but thats about all they do. 

 

Batteries are the issue of course. 

 

All EV’s will achieve is to increase the electricity bills everyone (even those without vehicles), then what ???....  more people will turn to natural gas to heat their homes !!!!! 

 

In fact, EV's are far more environmentally friendly.

 

YSE Study Finds Electric Vehicles Provide Lower Carbon Emissions Through Additional Channels

https://environment.yale.edu/news/article/yse-study-finds-electric-vehicles-provide-lower-carbon-emissions-through-additional

 

As for costs of solar and wind...Even before the current and massive increase in fossil fuel prices, when gas and coal prices were low, solar and wind had put coal use to generate power on the road to extinction and thanks to battery storage were endangering gas peaker plants. Now, of course, they're far cheaper.

 

[placeholder]

On 10/28/2022 at 6:47 AM, seedy said:

Wow - and you do not know what 'Free' means ...

Makes no difference if you power your car from excess solar - it still ain't 'Free'

Free is where the solar companies come to your house, install the panels, do the wiring, charge controller, etc, and leave without you having to pay one baht

That's Free

But the Musk-o-vites will NEVER admit that they're wrong, that solar panels are a no go for the vast majority of people who wish to have EV's - those that live in condos, apartments, in the city where EV make sense.

Only rich white people, patting themselves on the back, saying how smart they are, building Eco houses which are not eco, getting free electricity which is not free, and gloating at the rest of the population.

As evidenced in the many EV forums across the WWW

Thank you for showing what the opposite of a rigorous analysis like the one provided by Gweiloman looks like.

[placeholder]

On 10/28/2022 at 1:39 PM, seedy said:

So ... it is NOT 'Free'

 

am·or·tize

verb

past tense: amortised; past participle: amortised

1. gradually write off the initial cost of (an asset) over a period.

   "they want to amortize the tooling costs quickly"

   • reduce or pay off (a debt) with regular payments.

     "loan fees can be amortized over the life of the mortgage"

I guess to your way of thinking it's trivial that it's bound to save Gweiloman lots of money.

[placeholder]

On 10/28/2022 at 3:53 PM, tgw said:

hydrogen cars are the future, because Hydrogen can be produced without using electricity in the process (aluminium - gallium process).

car manufacturers need to agree on standardized fuel cell formats.

There is a big problem with hydrogen that is rarely acknowledged: hydrogen use will extend the life methane in the atmosphere. Right now, methane, which is a far more potent greenhouse gas than CO2, has a life of about 12 years before it gets oxidized. The thing is, hydrogen outcompetes methane for oxygen. It's inevitable that some hydrogen will leak into the atmosphere because it's the smallest of all molecules. It contributes in other ways, too.

 

Scientists warn against global warming effect of hydrogen leaks

Scientists have warned that hydrogen could be a significant “indirect” contributor to the greenhouse effect when it leaks through infrastructure and interacts with methane in the atmosphere.

“Hydrogen reacts to form tropospheric ozone, which also contributes to the greenhouse effect. And hydrogen also breaks down into water vapour in the stratosphere, which also contributes to the greenhouse effect,” he added.

https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy/news/scientists-warn-against-global-warming-effect-of-hydrogen-leaks/

[placeholder]

On 10/29/2022 at 2:02 PM, richard_smith237 said:

The UK has claimed it will stop the sale of ICE vehicles from 2030... thus, soon after the vast majority of households will have EV’s charging from their property. 

 

The calculations I used were for 1 EV charging per-household. 

The reality is that most households have more than one car, thus the assumption could be that the domestic draw will be greater than a 36% increase, perhaps as high as 50%. 

 

Will these vehicles also be charged at businesses ??...  perhaps reducing the household draw but increasing the electrical demand at the point of business. 

 

The discussion on efficiency and electricity demand aside; the UK government currently makes huge amounts of tax from the the petrol we put in our cars - in 2016 approximately 70% of the cost of petrol at the pump was tax made by the government. In 2022 that amount is approximately 50%. 

 

The government will want their money some way.... Will the taxation systems change ? will it shift to ‘usage’ i.e. yearly road tax based on mileage ? or will they increase tax on electricity ?

 

 

I can’t see a future where driving cars will be cheeper than it is now because. Even if we do provide our own electricity with solar panels etc... Even if we have local community solar systems to moderate peak demand etc...   I don’t see the the government’s happily missing out on the huge amounts of tax they currently receive from petroleum. 

Well, for one thing, the NHS will have lower costs than they otherwise would be..

Air Pollution from Fossil Fuels Costs $8 Billion Per Day, New Research Finds

https://e360.yale.edu/digest/air-pollution-from-fossil-fuels-costs-8-billion-per-day-new-research-finds

Edited October 30, 2022 by placeholder

[tgw]

11 minutes ago, placeholder said:

There is a big problem with hydrogen that is rarely acknowledged: hydrogen use will extend the life methane in the atmosphere. Right now, methane, which is a far more potent greenhouse gas than CO2, has a life of about 12 years before it gets oxidized. The thing is, hydrogen outcompetes methane for oxygen. It's inevitable that some hydrogen will leak into the atmosphere because it's the smallest of all molecules. It contributes in other ways, too.

 

Scientists warn against global warming effect of hydrogen leaks

Scientists have warned that hydrogen could be a significant “indirect” contributor to the greenhouse effect when it leaks through infrastructure and interacts with methane in the atmosphere.

“Hydrogen reacts to form tropospheric ozone, which also contributes to the greenhouse effect. And hydrogen also breaks down into water vapour in the stratosphere, which also contributes to the greenhouse effect,” he added.

https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy/news/scientists-warn-against-global-warming-effect-of-hydrogen-leaks/

well, in the article you linked they say:

- research is needed to know just how big of a problem hydrogen leakage really would be

- that leakage is/will be probably much less than first anticipated

- leakage is not really expected to be a big issue

 

let's hope hydrogen is a good solution.

Edited October 30, 2022 by tgw

[macahoom]

24 minutes ago, placeholder said:

 It's inevitable that some hydrogen will leak into the atmosphere because it's the smallest of all molecules.

If my memory of 'A-level' physics and chemistry from 54 years ago is correct, I think you mean to say "because it's the smallest of all atoms."

 

There's no such thing as a molecule of hydrogen; it's an element.

 

Edit: I just Googled this, and maybe I'm wrong and it is possible to have a molecule of hydrogen. Sorry! 

Edited October 30, 2022 by macahoom

[placeholder]

2 minutes ago, tgw said:

well, in the article you linked they say:

- research is needed to know just how big of a problem hydrogen leakage really would be

- that leakage is/will be probably much less than first anticipated

- leakage is not really expected to be a big issue

 

let's hope hydrogen is a good solution.

Let's hope that's correct. Because there is also good news about hydrogen. Lots actually, but here's one that is exceptionally good:

World's cheapest green hydrogen' | Start-up with ultra-efficient electrolyser to develop pilot factory after securing $29m

https://www.rechargenews.com/energy-transition/worlds-cheapest-green-hydrogen-start-up-with-ultra-efficient-electrolyser-to-develop-pilot-factory-after-securing-29m/2-1-1270403

[placeholder]

9 minutes ago, macahoom said:

If my memory of "A level" physics and chemistry from 54 years ago is correct, I think you mean to say "because it's the smallest of all atoms."

 

There's no such thing as a molecule of hydrogen; it's an element.  

Not so.. Like Oxygen, Hydrogen naturally occurs in weakly-bonded pairs in the atmosphere.

EDIT: I just recalled that what binds the hydrogen atoms together is called a "covalent bond".

Edited October 30, 2022 by placeholder

[tgw]

9 minutes ago, macahoom said:

If my memory of 'A-level' physics and chemistry from 54 years ago is correct, I think you mean to say "because it's the smallest of all atoms."

 

There's no such thing as a molecule of hydrogen; it's an element.  

H2