Discussion with Prospective Hydrogen Fuel Cell-Based Truck Manufacturer
This morning I received a generic, vanilla business plan from a fellow in Dresden, Germany (pictured) that contemplates the manufacturing and sales of a line of trucks with hydrogen fuel cell drive trains. My opinion is that no attempt to enter this business from scratch could possibly work, and especially one that doesn’t contemplate some secret sauce, i.e., an exciting idea that holds some potential level of promise. As I explained to him:
Here are a few questions that need to be answered:
What makes you more qualified than the huge automakers, e.g., Honda, to succeed at this? To stay with that example, Honda has dumped 20+ years and billions of dollars into this effort, and has been a dismal failure. For some reason, they haven’t given up, but they lose several hundred thousand dollars for each “Clarity” they sell.
What makes you think that the countries like the U.S. are going to build out their H2 fueling infrastructure, when it’s clear that no such effort is taking place, almost half a century after the discussion began in the early 1970s?
What about the lack of consumer interest? Drivers are having a tough time with battery EVs, and have almost zero interest in H2. Dealers are even less enthused.
How are you going to deal with the basic issues with fuel cells, i.e., that they are expensive and fragile? What about the issues with hydrogen itself, i.e., that electrolyzing water and reforming methane are both expensive and inefficient processes?
If you don’t have solid answers here, you may want to head in a different direction.
Craig,
I one way I agree with you. An underfunded individual has no chance of succeeding in attempting to commercialize a technology which require massive capital, engineering expertise, along with vast industrial, manufacturing, logistical resources.
Any stakeholder in HFCV manufacture must also have the total commitment and support from the other two stakeholders in a hydrogen roll-out, governments and hydrogen supply manufactures. Only major corporations the size of Shell, Chevron, Air liquide etc, have those sorts of resources.
You are correct, there can be no “pioneers” like Elon Musk in HFCV technology.
However, at that point you allow your lack of knowledge and outdated prejudice to destroy your credibility.
Hydrogen fuel vehicles are neither “fragile” “expensive” when mass manufactured!
Why you persist with these silly prejudices, even after being repeatedly shown evidence to the contray, is beyond me!
(For a person claiming to operate on “scientific” principles it seems strangely inconsistent!)
Nor is Honda the leading manufacturer, researcher or developer of Hydrogen fuel stack technology in the Auto industry.
Those titles would shared by Toyota and Hyundai. Both these companies have ably and conclusively demonstrated that HFCV technology is both practical, economically viable, and totally robust and safe.
The evidence for this has been available for longer than two decades and anyone trying to perpetrate old myths, is just plain silly or hopelessly dishonest.
HFCV technology, like BEV technology, hasn’t made a lot of headway simply because oil prices are so low the incentive to invest in a major roll-out isn’t justifiable.
Massive investment in HFCV technology will become justifiable if:
a) Oil prices dramatically increase permanently.
b) ESD capacity for EV’s remains restricted to a fairly small capacity with slow charging times, range and weight restrictions.
Since 2006 major corporations including Shell, Daimler-Benz, Toyota and GM, have completed extensive studies and business modelling on the dynamics of rolling out a global H2 network.
Such a roll out would not only be feasible and within the resources of the oil majors, but politically popular and highly profitable.
However, while oil and natural gas remain abundant and relatively cheap, why bother? (especially with the ever present risk of sudden breakthrough in EV ESD technology).
Craig, have you even bothered to take short journey and inspected the amazing Toyota Murai at ne of the eight Californian designated Toyota dealerships?
No ?
How about a quick trip down to Van Nuys Blvd, Van Nuys, California, to your local Hyudai dealer and test drive the 2019 Hyundai Nexo HFCV ?
Okay, I understand you prefer to sit at home discussing the breeding habits of Unicorns with ‘ol Glenn, but maybe next time you attend a Santa Barbara love-in, an enjoy the vibe of all being united in a common hatred for Trump and all his despised his supporters, maybe you could just spare a glance as you pass by your local equipment hire outlet and observe all those HFCV forklifts available ?
Unlike you, I’ve taken the time to drive and learn about HFCV technology from many different sources. I’ve driven early HFCV models as well as the latest three commercial offerings. (I even own three early examples of both HFCV and direct hydrogen fueled vehicles).
Your German would be environmentalist auto producer has one perspective correct, unlike you, he understands HFCV vehicles is a far more feasible technology than BEV, when it comes to heavy vehicles.
Trucks, buses and even aircraft have successfully proven the viability of HFCV technology.
A major “breakthrough” is imminent as developments in replacing expensive components like platinum with much cheaper and more durable materials are proving successful. These developments will dramatically lower production costs, reduce size and weight, while making mass production far easier and cheaper.
Trying to “choose sides” and blindly cheering for any particular technology, as if it were a football team, or faith based concept is kinda daft!
All technologies possess advantages and disadvantages. The trick is not to “choose sides” while ignoring other developments, but retain an open mind and evaluate each development objectively replacing emotion with commonsense.
For a technology to be accepted by the majority of consumers, it must have many attractive features, not simply one aspect.
An alternative would be a methane fuel cell such as the Ceres Power steel (coated with Cerium oxide)fuel cell which converts LPG or compressed natural gas to electricity with 60% net efficiency.
This fuel cell has low cost, and is highly robust. This approach would be about twice as efficient as an internal combustion engine, with around a quarter of the CO2 emissions and virtually no NOX or particulates.
Gary,
Thank you for your interesting comment. Cerium is a relatively economical material and despite being classified as a ‘rare’ earth is more common than lead.
I’m afraid drawing attention to this promising technology is unlikely to excite Craig, who remains stubbornly resistant to the possibility of any new technology not deemed ‘politically’ correct by that famous scientist, Bill Nye, the science guy.
Except ‘ol bill is really a scientist at all ! He did obtain a Bachelor degree in Mechanical Engineering, and bought a number of bow ties, but that’s about the height of his academic achievement.
What he has done, is cobble together a lot of popular and politically correct jargon, mixed with the talents of a really adept flim-flam artists, and sold himself a a pundit extraordinaire!