My gas vehicle has a range of just under 400 miles per tank, which is not much more than most EV's. As far as hauling ability, why don't you google the F-150 Lightning and take a look at its specs? It's good to educate oneself before posting, Tiger.
Why EV's suck on energy efficiency
- Thread starter T. A. Gardner
- Start date
My gas vehicle has a range of just under 400 miles per tank, which is not much more than most EV's. As far as hauling ability, why don't you google the F-150 Lightning and take a look at its specs? It's good to educate oneself before posting, Tiger.
Riiiiight.......
DC fast chargers take 45 minutes to fully charge. People use that for travel. Try having lunch and gassing up in under 45 minutes.
Boy, you guys and your propaganda are fun.
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
I plan on driving to White Sands to get some research at the base museum there in the near future. Two gas stops in Wilcox and Deming all of maybe 20 minutes total including exit and reentry onto the highway. Do a solid 80 mph the whole way with maybe a bit of a reduction through Tucson and Phoenix. None of the other towns or cities are big enough to effect that other than if a highway patrol is lurking...
9 to 10 hours drive. Looking at an EV charging station map by the DoE, that stretch from about Benson AZ to White Sands looks pretty baren for charging stations too...
Into the Night
Verified User
Obviously you never watched the video.
No, it doesn't. You turn the car off when you park it. Several cars (and most gas powered golf carts) automatically shut off when stopped, and start again when you accelerate. Most modern FADEC cars today shut down unneeded cylinders when decelerating or stopped. They simply don't receive fuel.
Apparently you have never heard of lubrication. Did you know the EV also requires lubrication?
Electric motors don't have an efficiency rating.
A modern reciprocating gasoline engine often runs at or close to 50% efficiency. The rest is waste heat, which can be tapped to heat the cabin of the car in winter.
No, it doesn't. It is a heat engine like any other.
No. Batteries are not used to run the traction motors on a diesel-electric locomotive. The diesel engine's throttle is adjusted to the demands of the load.
No. That electricity must be generated (using a heat engine usually), then converted (generating waste heat) up to a voltage for transmission (generating waste heat), then reconverted down (generating waste heat) to distribution lines running for long distances along the tracks (which generates waste heat), tapped by the locomotive(s), then used to run the traction motors (which also generates waste heat).
Such trains use about half again or even twice the energy of a diesel electric locomotive or even of a steam locomotive.
You obviously didn't watch the video.
Into the Night
Verified User
At the end of it's range, a gasoline vehicle requires only a few minutes to refuel. An EV requires much longer time to recharge, even lasting into hours, depending on the charger you can find, and doesn't have the range or the performance.
The F-150E (the Lightning) is a joke. It can't haul a full load for anything much behind a 100 miles. It is impractical as a truck. That sucker is expensive too.
Did you know the best selling vehicle last year was the Ford F-150 (gasoline powered), followed by the Chevy Silverado (gasoline powered) and the Dodge RAM (gasoline powered). All trucks. All gasoline powered.
Into the Night
Verified User
I already know you have given up and are being defeatist. There is really no point to that.
Have a nice trip!
Into the Night
Verified User
IF you can find one. IF there is no line for it. IF you stick to the freeways where these are located.
IF you can meet all the conditions above.
I eat on the go while I'm traveling. It's easy.
I don't waste 45 minutes fueling up my vehicle. I can fuel it up along most any road. I don't have to stick to freeways. I don't have to carefully plan to be exactly out of power just as I reach that rare level 3 charger. I don't have to wait in line for it. Fueling stations for gasoline cars are numerous and in every town. I can drive at the posted speed (and even faster) without sacrificing range that much.
Do you know how many Teslas I blow by on 80mph freeways because they are driving 60 to save charge? You twits are a hazard, dude!
Its a little like those tiny Smartcars. if all you do is bop around town or to work they're fine.
But for me the late model requirement is key since these batteries don't last forever. But there are just not that many people whose needs suit the limitations.
Into the Night
Verified User
Heh. I see those Smartcars and they always look to me like someone forgot half the car when they drove off. They really do look ridiculous.
They're dangerous too. Crash tests with these things revealed something interesting.
The car is basically shaped like a sphere. This is a strong shape. The car sustains little damage.
The occupants, however are a different story. With almost no crushing zones on this car, the occupants bounce around inside the sphere suffering great damage, even with belts and air bags.
The downside of such a small car that is basically shaped like a modified sphere.
Frankly, I wouldn't even bop around town in one. Riding a bicycle on the street is safer.
You also bring up another important point I remind the EV religious nuts: the resale value of these cars is terrible. Used batteries have already reduced range. As they age, they will have less and less range until they don't charge much at all. Replacing the battery on a Tesla model Y, for example, will cost you $25,000 plus labor! You can BUY a new gasoline car for that! Only a specially equipped shop (authorized by the dealer) has the facilities to safely handle this very dangerous procedure.
Replacing an engine will only cost you no more than $2000 plus labor, and usually much less. Any competent mechanic can do this.
The last time I pulled an engine out to replace it was on an old Subaru. It took me only 11 1/2 minutes to pull that engine (my current speed record!).
When I pull an engine on an airplane, it's not to replace it...it's to rebuild it.
I will happily stick with my gas and diesel vehicles. I have a lot of stuff to haul for long distances. I travel quite a bit both by car and by air. I use my airplanes for actually flying places. EVs just won't cut it. They have neither the range nor the performance, due to their heavy batteries and long charge times.
yeah smart cars are kinda silly but they are very easy to park, great gas milage very serviceable for a niche group. just as EVs are serviceable for a different niche group. well to do who have multiple vehicles.
The real cost for an engine replacement is well above 4 K and takes weeks. https://www.consumeraffairs.com/automotive/how-much-does-it-cost-to-replace-an-engine.html They can cost more than 10 K too depending on what engine you have to replace. About 2 million engine replacements happen per year.
Theywillneverlearn!
Verified User
For a limp dick liberal like yourself who cannot even turn a screw driver. STFU.
serendipity
Verified User
serendipity
Verified User
Goldman Sachs: Hydrogen Generation Could Grow Into $1 Trillion Per Year Market
Hydrogen power has been on the market for decades but has never really been able to break the glass ceiling of mass-market appeal, mainly due to a host of technical and cost issues. But some experts now believe that the hydrogen economy is ready for take-off, with Goldman Sachs predicting hydrogen generation could eventually grow into a $1 trillion per year market. The EU has hatched a highly ambitious plan to install 40 gigawatts of electrolyzers within its borders and support the development of another 40 gigawatts of green hydrogen in nearby countries that can export to the EU by 2030. The EU has also pledged to cut Russian gas imports by two-thirds by the end of the year and has doubled down on green energy fuels by increasing renewable hydrogen production.
And Citigroup analysts are now particularly bullish about one hydrogen sub-sector: fuel cells. Fuel cells are used in specialty vehicles such as forklifts and by energy consumers to complement electricity from the grid to smooth energy costs and ensure reliability. According to the analysts, the global fuel cell industry is a direct play on the green energy debate, and “reaching the part that batteries cannot.”
“Fuel cells enable both de-carbonization and energy resilience, and we see them as crucial in harder-to-abate sectors like commercial vehicles and marine,” a Citi team told clients in a note on Tuesday, carried by MarketWatch.
Citi’s base case sees the fuel cell market hitting 50 gigawatts (GW) and $40 billion by 2030, good for more than 35% CAGR in dollar terms, with further acceleration to 500GW/$180 billion by 2040. “The fuel cell equity story has had false starts before, but we see the impetus from emissions policy as well as announced hydrogen plans as creating attractive opportunities,” the analysts have said, highlighting policies such as the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act.
Citi has picked U.K.-based Ceres Power (LSE: CWR), New York-based Plug Power Inc. (PLUG), Belgium’s Umicore SA (EBR: UMI), and Japan’s Toyota Motor Corp (TM) as the bank’s buy-rated stocks with high exposure to the fuel-cell theme.
What Is Holding The Hydrogen Boom Back?
But for all the buzz surrounding the hydrogen economy, the sector has badly underperformed the market this year. Hydrogen and fuel-cell stocks have been pounded, losing about 70% YTD compared to -25.1% by the S&P 500. Even the leaders of the space have not fared much better: PLUG stock has returned -31.3% YTD while shares of peer FuelCell Energy, Inc. (FCEL) have lost 45.7% over the timeframe.
But it’s not been all doom and gloom, though: back in August, Plug Power signed a deal to supply liquid green hydrogen to Amazon Inc. (AMZN) beginning 2025 to help decarbonize the ecommerce giant’s operations.
As part of the deal, Plug will grant Amazon a warrant to acquire up to 16M common shares, with an exercise price for the first 9M warrant shares of ~$22.98/share, and for the rest a price equal to 90% of Plug's 30-day volume weighted average share price when the first 9M shares are vested. Amazon would vest the warrant in full if it spends $2.1B over the seven-year term of the warrant across Plug products, including electrolyzers, fuel cell solutions and green hydrogen.
Under the deal, Plug Power will supply 10,950 tons/year of liquid green hydrogen beginning January 2025, something the company has termed as a "growth opportunity" that is expected to help it reach its $3B revenue goal by 2025. On its part, Amazon says the contract should provide enough annual power for 30K forklifts or 800 heavy-duty trucks used in long-haul transportation.
Despite the bright long-term outlook for the hydrogen sector, companies like Plug Power have been recording ballooning operating costs leading to widening losses. For Q2 2022, PLUG’s operating expenses increased 132% year-over-year to $114.44 million; operating loss widened 63.9% Y/Y to $146.91 million while net loss and net loss per share worsened 73.9% and 66.7% year-over-year, respectively. For the full year, PLUG has a consensus loss per share estimate of $0.94, good for 14.8% year-over-year increase.
Meanwhile, FuelCell saw Its Q3 2022 loss for the period ended July loss from operations expand 164.5% year-over-year to $28 million while adjusted EBITDA loss widened 301.5% year-over-year to $20.77 million. The company’s consensus revenue estimate of $27.87 million for the fiscal 2023 first quarter indicates a 12.4% Y/Y decline.
Varying Expectations
These are still early days into the hydrogen boom, and analysts are saying that varying expectations around how financing and offtake deals are structured is one of the reasons why deals have been hard to close.
Currently, there is no merchant market for hydrogen. For hydrogen projects to become financeable, they must have a bankable offtake scheme. But expectations around how financing and offtake deals will be structured vary widely, adding complexity to the contracting process, as Frank O'Sullivan, managing director at venture capital firm S2G Ventures, has told the ACORE Finance Forum. There's also no shortage of investors interested in the hydrogen sector, but many are sitting on the sidelines and watching to see how the first round of deals pans out.
"There isn't a single model that defines, this is how the hydrogen play works. There will be several models, and those models have not emerged yet," O'Sullivan has said.
It's a viewpoint reiterated by Greg Cameron, executive vice president and chief financial officer of hydrogen fuel cell maker Bloom Energy (BE). According to Cameron, on one end, there's the acquisition of energy needed to drive electrolysis. On the other end, there are the off-takers, who may come from diverse industries with different expectations for how a contract should be structured.
Luckily, O'Sullivan says that the path to getting actual hydrogen infrastructure off the ground is relatively clear. The capital costs associated with electrolysis are declining, while access to renewable energy that's cheap enough to generate hydrogen from water and still sell a cost-competitive fuel is on the horizon.
Rachel Crouch, a senior associate at giant British-American multinational law firm Norton Rose Fulbright, has proposed that existing use cases for hydrogen--which today rely almost exclusively on gray hydrogen--may be among the first green or blue hydrogen opportunities to be financeable because the offtake picture is already clear and is likely easier to model.
Crouch suggests ammonia is one such area because a market already exists for ammonia, and several green ammonia projects have been proposed or are in the early stages of development.
She sees petroleum refining as another area where bankable early green or blue hydrogen projects are likely to emerge because refineries are among the largest users of hydrogen as a fuel stock. In this case, early-stage hydrogen projects may contract with refineries as offtakers, and notes that several pilot projects are already being developed in this sector. Crouch adds that specialty vehicles are also showing early promise where hydrogen is already being used to power fuel cells.
https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/gol...n-could-grow-into-$1-trillion-per-year-market
Hydrogen power has been on the market for decades but has never really been able to break the glass ceiling of mass-market appeal, mainly due to a host of technical and cost issues. But some experts now believe that the hydrogen economy is ready for take-off, with Goldman Sachs predicting hydrogen generation could eventually grow into a $1 trillion per year market. The EU has hatched a highly ambitious plan to install 40 gigawatts of electrolyzers within its borders and support the development of another 40 gigawatts of green hydrogen in nearby countries that can export to the EU by 2030. The EU has also pledged to cut Russian gas imports by two-thirds by the end of the year and has doubled down on green energy fuels by increasing renewable hydrogen production.
And Citigroup analysts are now particularly bullish about one hydrogen sub-sector: fuel cells. Fuel cells are used in specialty vehicles such as forklifts and by energy consumers to complement electricity from the grid to smooth energy costs and ensure reliability. According to the analysts, the global fuel cell industry is a direct play on the green energy debate, and “reaching the part that batteries cannot.”
“Fuel cells enable both de-carbonization and energy resilience, and we see them as crucial in harder-to-abate sectors like commercial vehicles and marine,” a Citi team told clients in a note on Tuesday, carried by MarketWatch.
Citi’s base case sees the fuel cell market hitting 50 gigawatts (GW) and $40 billion by 2030, good for more than 35% CAGR in dollar terms, with further acceleration to 500GW/$180 billion by 2040. “The fuel cell equity story has had false starts before, but we see the impetus from emissions policy as well as announced hydrogen plans as creating attractive opportunities,” the analysts have said, highlighting policies such as the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act.
Citi has picked U.K.-based Ceres Power (LSE: CWR), New York-based Plug Power Inc. (PLUG), Belgium’s Umicore SA (EBR: UMI), and Japan’s Toyota Motor Corp (TM) as the bank’s buy-rated stocks with high exposure to the fuel-cell theme.
What Is Holding The Hydrogen Boom Back?
But for all the buzz surrounding the hydrogen economy, the sector has badly underperformed the market this year. Hydrogen and fuel-cell stocks have been pounded, losing about 70% YTD compared to -25.1% by the S&P 500. Even the leaders of the space have not fared much better: PLUG stock has returned -31.3% YTD while shares of peer FuelCell Energy, Inc. (FCEL) have lost 45.7% over the timeframe.
But it’s not been all doom and gloom, though: back in August, Plug Power signed a deal to supply liquid green hydrogen to Amazon Inc. (AMZN) beginning 2025 to help decarbonize the ecommerce giant’s operations.
As part of the deal, Plug will grant Amazon a warrant to acquire up to 16M common shares, with an exercise price for the first 9M warrant shares of ~$22.98/share, and for the rest a price equal to 90% of Plug's 30-day volume weighted average share price when the first 9M shares are vested. Amazon would vest the warrant in full if it spends $2.1B over the seven-year term of the warrant across Plug products, including electrolyzers, fuel cell solutions and green hydrogen.
Under the deal, Plug Power will supply 10,950 tons/year of liquid green hydrogen beginning January 2025, something the company has termed as a "growth opportunity" that is expected to help it reach its $3B revenue goal by 2025. On its part, Amazon says the contract should provide enough annual power for 30K forklifts or 800 heavy-duty trucks used in long-haul transportation.
Despite the bright long-term outlook for the hydrogen sector, companies like Plug Power have been recording ballooning operating costs leading to widening losses. For Q2 2022, PLUG’s operating expenses increased 132% year-over-year to $114.44 million; operating loss widened 63.9% Y/Y to $146.91 million while net loss and net loss per share worsened 73.9% and 66.7% year-over-year, respectively. For the full year, PLUG has a consensus loss per share estimate of $0.94, good for 14.8% year-over-year increase.
Meanwhile, FuelCell saw Its Q3 2022 loss for the period ended July loss from operations expand 164.5% year-over-year to $28 million while adjusted EBITDA loss widened 301.5% year-over-year to $20.77 million. The company’s consensus revenue estimate of $27.87 million for the fiscal 2023 first quarter indicates a 12.4% Y/Y decline.
Varying Expectations
These are still early days into the hydrogen boom, and analysts are saying that varying expectations around how financing and offtake deals are structured is one of the reasons why deals have been hard to close.
Currently, there is no merchant market for hydrogen. For hydrogen projects to become financeable, they must have a bankable offtake scheme. But expectations around how financing and offtake deals will be structured vary widely, adding complexity to the contracting process, as Frank O'Sullivan, managing director at venture capital firm S2G Ventures, has told the ACORE Finance Forum. There's also no shortage of investors interested in the hydrogen sector, but many are sitting on the sidelines and watching to see how the first round of deals pans out.
"There isn't a single model that defines, this is how the hydrogen play works. There will be several models, and those models have not emerged yet," O'Sullivan has said.
It's a viewpoint reiterated by Greg Cameron, executive vice president and chief financial officer of hydrogen fuel cell maker Bloom Energy (BE). According to Cameron, on one end, there's the acquisition of energy needed to drive electrolysis. On the other end, there are the off-takers, who may come from diverse industries with different expectations for how a contract should be structured.
Luckily, O'Sullivan says that the path to getting actual hydrogen infrastructure off the ground is relatively clear. The capital costs associated with electrolysis are declining, while access to renewable energy that's cheap enough to generate hydrogen from water and still sell a cost-competitive fuel is on the horizon.
Rachel Crouch, a senior associate at giant British-American multinational law firm Norton Rose Fulbright, has proposed that existing use cases for hydrogen--which today rely almost exclusively on gray hydrogen--may be among the first green or blue hydrogen opportunities to be financeable because the offtake picture is already clear and is likely easier to model.
Crouch suggests ammonia is one such area because a market already exists for ammonia, and several green ammonia projects have been proposed or are in the early stages of development.
She sees petroleum refining as another area where bankable early green or blue hydrogen projects are likely to emerge because refineries are among the largest users of hydrogen as a fuel stock. In this case, early-stage hydrogen projects may contract with refineries as offtakers, and notes that several pilot projects are already being developed in this sector. Crouch adds that specialty vehicles are also showing early promise where hydrogen is already being used to power fuel cells.
https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/gol...n-could-grow-into-$1-trillion-per-year-market
Into the Night
Verified User
Lie. False authority fallacy.
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
You are being disingenuous here. Reading your own article, the cost varies from as low as possibly $1000 using a junkyard engine and your own mechanic or even do-it-yourself, to $4 to $10,000 at a dealer (possibly more) where only the most ignorant, clueless, and uncaring about the cost would take their vehicle to have this done.
So, the cost could be quite reasonable on an older vehicle using a second-hand engine and either an inexpensive (that means doesn't cost a lot v. is a poor mechanic) mechanic or doing it yourself. Or it could be quite costly getting a new engine replacement and having the dealer do the work.
With EV's you are saddled with going to the dealer most of the time so you get the costly version because it's forced on you by the manufacturer.