# water powered ev???



## NintendoKD (Apr 29, 2012)

Ok, folks, it has been out since 05' I know because I saw the tv ad in 05. Explain this one:
http://automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarity/
water powered EV, why can't I buy one? Why isn't this on the news?


----------



## EVEngineeer (Apr 11, 2012)

That looks like a great car. I saw it said you can only lease it for 3 years and you have to live in california and it costs $600 a month and they are leasing only 200 of them. I hope buy the time they start actually selling them in Florida, they will cost less. Many luxury cars like lexus don't get that much money for a lease, so even though it is honda, it better be a luxury car


----------



## SandRailEV (May 11, 2012)

Looks to me like it's hydrogen powered, not water powered...


----------



## major (Apr 4, 2008)

NintendoKD said:


> ....water powered EV,...


It's a hydrogen fuel cell car, not water powered


----------



## EVEngineeer (Apr 11, 2012)

it is hydrogen, but the hydrogen comes from water. of course you can't run it on water, but usually hydrogen powered stuff gets the fuel from water and removes the hydrogen from it. Then it emits oxygen, which actually helps the environment, unlike the gas cars that emit CO2.


----------



## bjfreeman (Dec 7, 2011)

Yup just like current cars are powered by Crude oil


----------



## frodus (Apr 12, 2008)

And another thing to add, most production (~95%) of hydrogen is usually from reforming fossil fuels, and not electrolysis. Reforming still produces CO2 as a byproduct even though the fuel cell does not. A lot of the production uses Methane, Propane, Ethanol and Gasoline.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_economy

Still uses fossil fuels and still releases CO2 (although in lower amounts).


----------



## SandRailEV (May 11, 2012)

EVEngineeer said:


> it is hydrogen, but the hydrogen comes from water. of course you can't run it on water, but usually hydrogen powered stuff gets the fuel from water and removes the hydrogen from it. Then it emits oxygen, which actually helps the environment, unlike the gas cars that emit CO2.


 
And where exactly does the ENERGY to separate hydrogen from water come from??


----------



## jeremyjs (Sep 22, 2010)

Not to mention that by the time you produce, compress, transport, and run it through a fuel cell you've wasted 3/4 or more of the energy used to produce it and you have to haul around a 10,000 psi pressure vessel inside your car. Not to mention needing all new infrastructure to make it viable. I'd rather stick electricity in batteries myself.


----------



## bjfreeman (Dec 7, 2011)

the hydrogen used for PEM cells in Home power plants, do use reforming, of natural gas.
The Hydogen for supplying autos, in Calif, and west coast is done by electrolysis and stored locally to the generation point.
the Further north you go on the West coast the more Hydro power, and now Wind power is used for the electrolysis.

The Biggest electrolysis Hydrogen plants are in BC. The supply the Fuel cell Bus Fleet.


----------



## jeremyjs (Sep 22, 2010)

bjfreeman said:


> the hydrogen used for PEM cells in Home power plants, do use reforming, of natural gas.
> The Hydogen for supplying autos, in Calif, and west coast is done by electrolysis and stored locally to the generation point.
> the Further north you go on the West coast the more Hydro power, and now Wind power is used for the electrolysis.
> 
> The Biggest electrolysis Hydrogen plants are in BC. The supply the Fuel cell Bus Fleet.


And they waste 3/4 or more, likely more, of the power they produce using it to make hydrogen.


----------



## bjfreeman (Dec 7, 2011)

I find it interesting the most have missed the reason for going hydrogen, is environment.
How do you fold those costs into your calculations.


----------



## jeremyjs (Sep 22, 2010)

bjfreeman said:


> I find it interesting the most have missed the reason for going hydrogen, is environment.
> How do you fold those costs into your calculations.



If you are throwing away 3/4+ of the electricity you need 4x more solar, wind, hydro, etc. to make it work than just putting the energy into batteries. So I'd say it's much worse for the environment than batteries. So you're taking an source of electricity that's already expensive and making it's capitol costs 4x higher. Not even mentioning the costs or inefficiencies of the fuel cells; which when compared to batteries are pretty bad.


----------



## bjfreeman (Dec 7, 2011)

I don't argue hydrogen again battery only.
Batteries, currently KW/KG against range is limited.
a 1000 AH cell is 97lbs.
when you multiply that for 765 Volts, used by commercial EV, you looking at 87 tons. not to mention the space. you floorboard would be 3 feet thick.


----------



## jeremyjs (Sep 22, 2010)

bjfreeman said:


> I don't argue hydrogen again battery only.
> Batteries, currently KW/KG against range is limited.
> a 1000 AH cell is 97lbs.
> when you multiply that for 765 Volts, used by commercial EV, you looking at 87 tons. not to mention the space. you floorboard would be 3 feet thick.


Why would you need 1000 ah at 765 volts? That's 3/4 of a MW/h. What do you want to do drive 1000 miles on a charge?

And I hate to tell you this, but the energy density of hydrogen after you run it through a fuel cell isn't much better than batteries by volume when you include all of the support equipment to carry and move it around at pressure.


----------



## SandRailEV (May 11, 2012)

The bottom line here is that hydrogen is not now nor will it ever be a viable source of fuel for road vehicles. It's not a matter of opinion really, the laws of physics will not allow portable storage of enough hydrogen to drive a car very far. You can throw all the money in the world at it but it still won't be viable.

Further, hydrogen production takes boat-loads of energy, more than what it returns... Again, the laws of physics... Argue it all you want, it will never work...


Also, the fuel cell car is still not a water powered car...


----------



## bjfreeman (Dec 7, 2011)

reminds me of a Ostrich with it's head in the ground.
There *ARE *fleet Buses running on Hydrogen PEM cells.
There *are* Cars running on Hydrogen PEM cells with Refueling points.

How does you law of physics account for those?
How does that match that it won't work?


----------



## SandRailEV (May 11, 2012)

I am not saying that hydrogen can't make a car go forward, I am saying that hydrogen as a fuel for passengers will never be cost-effective due to the physical properties of hydrogen.

Do the math from beginning to end. If you're still a believer, well, ok...


----------



## bjfreeman (Dec 7, 2011)

you can say the same for EV with muliti-million $ loans to Tesla and Fisker.
Not to mention the Gov subsidies to the Japanese versions.
if you start from Batteries Technologies, and production.
Be sure to factor in the environmental cost as well.

The fact some Fuel Cell vehicles are running now, says there are ways to make it work, and with electrolysis, method of generation is envirormentaly better.


----------



## jeremyjs (Sep 22, 2010)

bjfreeman said:


> you can say the same for EV with muliti-million $ loans to Tesla and Fisker.
> Not to mention the Gov subsidies to the Japanese versions.
> if you start from Batteries Technologies, and production.
> Be sure to factor in the environmental cost as well.
> ...


Batteries are getting steadily better and cheaper. Hydrogen is not and due to it's inherent properties can't and won't, but it doesn't matter. The batteries are already better. 

I'm done.


----------



## ricklearned (Mar 3, 2012)

bjfreeman said:


> you can say the same for EV with muliti-million $ loans to Tesla and Fisker.
> Not to mention the Gov subsidies to the Japanese versions.
> if you start from Batteries Technologies, and production.
> Be sure to factor in the environmental cost as well.
> ...


I think one of the facts about Fuel Cells that are running now is that they are getting subsidized. 

My electric bicycle is working without a subsidy and soon my car will be finished without the benefit of any government subsidy. The solar panels on the roof of my home will charge it with no incremental cost to me.


----------



## SandRailEV (May 11, 2012)

bjfreeman said:


> you can say the same for EV with muliti-million $ loans to Tesla and Fisker.
> Not to mention the Gov subsidies to the Japanese versions.
> if you start from Batteries Technologies, and production.
> Be sure to factor in the environmental cost as well.
> ...


 
As I said, if you're a believer, great.


----------



## Jason Lattimer (Dec 27, 2008)

The car in question is called the Honda Clarity and its production cost is eight million dollars. That's why you can't buy one.


----------



## bjfreeman (Dec 7, 2011)

I would be interested not only in the figures and financing for all non ICE vehicles
http://electricandhybridcars.com/

including the effects on the environment which I find hard to quantify


----------



## NintendoKD (Apr 29, 2012)

jeremyjs said:


> If you are throwing away 3/4+ of the electricity you need 4x more solar, wind, hydro, etc. to make it work than just putting the energy into batteries. So I'd say it's much worse for the environment than batteries. So you're taking an source of electricity that's already expensive and making it's capitol costs 4x higher. Not even mentioning the costs or inefficiencies of the fuel cells; which when compared to batteries are pretty bad.



do you have any idea the amount of industrial pollution is created from creation, recycling, and disposal of said batteries? the original model used a supercap, they went li-ion, not sure of the tech reasons why.


----------



## NintendoKD (Apr 29, 2012)

SandRailEV said:


> The bottom line here is that hydrogen is not now nor will it ever be a viable source of fuel for road vehicles. It's not a matter of opinion really, the laws of physics will not allow portable storage of enough hydrogen to drive a car very far. You can throw all the money in the world at it but it still won't be viable.
> 
> Further, hydrogen production takes boat-loads of energy, more than what it returns... Again, the laws of physics... Argue it all you want, it will never work...
> 
> ...



you are so right *bows down to almighty science that know all* NOT! look, this is a step in the right direction, just because you do not know a different way don't knock this one. Besides if it wasn't the least bit lucrative do you REALLY think that Honda would produce them? so your whole theory about using more energy that you gain is out. do you proofread what you post before you post it? I admit that it is not water powered, you got me, I got a little carried away there, only bi-product is water is what I meant to say. FYI I built a car that runs on water, and uses an ICE, via a very particular process that I am currently awaiting a provisional patent on. The secret? over-unity HA! you wish. no the secret is an already existing "process" that is "present" and calculating the most efficient power/frequency in the circuit while calculating the water as part of the circuit. Can you say semiconductor? This works with all forms of water, recycled, hot, cold, dirty, clean, and even...... yes, distilled "interestingly enough it is an excellent insulator unless MOTIVATED properly" Thank you Stan Meyer and Daniel Dingle for excellent Ideas. Now for the hitch, a similar technology is being used by the defense department and is currently in use in the Star Wars program,and has been since the 70's thanks again Stan Meyer, and yes, Daniel Dingle. Electricity from a fuel cell? but think about it, if it goes one way, why wouldn't it go the other, like a peltier junction, add electrical energy and it gets hot and cold, add hot and cold and electrical energy is produced, BIG HINT! HINT HINT!!! depends on what side of E=MC2 you swap around with algebraically, you know mass, energy, and the speed of light? guy named Einstein? he's not that important. light is substitutable for electrical potential for all intents and purposes in this case. I produce hydrogen and oxygen on demand, separate them with an electromagnetic field "they are charged particles" and direct them into the engine, this is produced on demand, and stops production when the engine stops, it can be used on any size engine, to produce as much "fuel" as necessary. This system also has other uses, such as water purification, heating and cooling, cooking, welding, electrical power generation. If you want to know how it works, or want to see a demo, suck it. I have already decided that this technology is not suitable for the general public, and I have my own reasons for doing so. This is not a joke, scam, or "free" energy. Now back on the subject at hand. I admit that this technology is not very feasible right now, however, with that said there are a lot of unknowns, how is the hydrogen stored? is it safe? Honda surely wouldn't sell something that is unsafe would they? I have some ideas on this but I'll keep my mouth shut for now. A hydrogen station is not available everywhere in Cali, what is the cost effectiveness of utilizing an at home fill device? vs lets say current EV chargers. I say lets stop bashing each other and this budding new technology and give it some support this is probably one of the best moves to actually "helping the environment" that we can make. I personally would like to know a lot more about it so let's not speculate shall we? this could end up going the way of the dinosaur and not making it's round again until our grandkids are born "much like the early EV's of yesteryear" No offense intended, just check yourself


----------



## NintendoKD (Apr 29, 2012)

SandRailEV said:


> The bottom line here is that hydrogen is not now nor will it ever be a viable source of fuel for road vehicles. It's not a matter of opinion really, the laws of physics will not allow portable storage of enough hydrogen to drive a car very far. You can throw all the money in the world at it but it still won't be viable.
> 
> Further, hydrogen production takes boat-loads of energy, more than what it returns... Again, the laws of physics... Argue it all you want, it will never work...
> 
> ...


sure you are sooooo right, that is exactly why Honda has been making these things since 2005. got it, I made a mistake, a BIG one it produces water as a bi-product. I am also curious as to the life expectancy of the cell any guesses?


----------



## NintendoKD (Apr 29, 2012)

jeremyjs said:


> Batteries are getting steadily better and cheaper. Hydrogen is not and due to it's inherent properties can't and won't, but it doesn't matter. The batteries are already better.
> 
> I'm done.


cost of batteries in industrial pollution? you don't know do you, well neither do I I'm done


----------



## NintendoKD (Apr 29, 2012)

bjfreeman said:


> I would be interested not only in the figures and financing for all non ICE vehicles
> http://electricandhybridcars.com/
> 
> including the effects on the environment which I find hard to quantify


me too, I am also curious about this. I think that the more that we say we can't do something the more we limit ourselves, at one time we "couldn't" travel to 100 mph or we would simply rattle our molecules apart, we "couldn't" run a mile in under 4 minutes, our bodies would fall apart, and right now we "can't" do what we believe that is unachievable.


----------



## SandRailEV (May 11, 2012)

NintendoKD said:


> sure you are sooooo right, that is exactly why Honda has been making these things since 2005. got it, I made a mistake, a BIG one it produces water as a bi-product. I am also curious as to the life expectancy of the cell any guesses?


 
Gee, sounds like you're getting a little emotional here... No need for that...

Take a gander at this link.. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_economy

Read through it about the cost and environmental impact of producing hydrogen.. Take note where industry gets the energy and raw materials from to produce hydrogen... If you think it's still has merit, great... I'm not knocking you... But from what I have read, it doesn't look very promising...


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

NintendoKD said:


> you are so right *bows down to almighty science that know all* NOT! look, this is a step in the right direction, just because you do not know a different way don't knock this one. Besides if it wasn't the least bit lucrative do you REALLY think that Honda would produce them? so your whole theory about using more energy that you gain is out. do you proofread what you post before you post it? I admit that it is not water powered, you got me, I got a little carried away there, only bi-product is water is what I meant to say. FYI I built a car that runs on water, and uses an ICE, via a very particular process that I am currently awaiting a provisional patent on. The secret? over-unity HA! you wish. no the secret is an already existing "process" that is "present" and calculating the most efficient power/frequency in the circuit while calculating the water as part of the circuit. Can you say semiconductor? This works with all forms of water, recycled, hot, cold, dirty, clean, and even...... yes, distilled "interestingly enough it is an excellent insulator unless MOTIVATED properly" Thank you Stan Meyer and Daniel Dingle for excellent Ideas. Now for the hitch, a similar technology is being used by the defense department and is currently in use in the Star Wars program,and has been since the 70's thanks again Stan Meyer, and yes, Daniel Dingle. Electricity from a fuel cell? but think about it, if it goes one way, why wouldn't it go the other, like a peltier junction, add electrical energy and it gets hot and cold, add hot and cold and electrical energy is produced, BIG HINT! HINT HINT!!! depends on what side of E=MC2 you swap around with algebraically, you know mass, energy, and the speed of light? guy named Einstein? he's not that important. light is substitutable for electrical potential for all intents and purposes in this case. I produce hydrogen and oxygen on demand, separate them with an electromagnetic field "they are charged particles" and direct them into the engine, this is produced on demand, and stops production when the engine stops, it can be used on any size engine, to produce as much "fuel" as necessary. This system also has other uses, such as water purification, heating and cooling, cooking, welding, electrical power generation. If you want to know how it works, or want to see a demo, suck it. I have already decided that this technology is not suitable for the general public, and I have my own reasons for doing so. This is not a joke, scam, or "free" energy. Now back on the subject at hand. I admit that this technology is not very feasible right now, however, with that said there are a lot of unknowns, how is the hydrogen stored? is it safe? Honda surely wouldn't sell something that is unsafe would they? I have some ideas on this but I'll keep my mouth shut for now. A hydrogen station is not available everywhere in Cali, what is the cost effectiveness of utilizing an at home fill device? vs lets say current EV chargers. I say lets stop bashing each other and this budding new technology and give it some support this is probably one of the best moves to actually "helping the environment" that we can make. I personally would like to know a lot more about it so let's not speculate shall we? this could end up going the way of the dinosaur and not making it's round again until our grandkids are born "much like the early EV's of yesteryear" No offense intended, just check yourself



To sum it up in a few less words NintendoKD is a loony and this should be moved to the perpetual motion thread


----------



## ricklearned (Mar 3, 2012)

The economics might work where you have cheap hydro power. I have free power and am going to stick with my lithiums. It is nice to have choices.
Edit: I posted this from my Android and my response relates to an earlier post.


----------



## Tatsushige (Mar 24, 2011)

Toyota and a few others here looked at fuel cells, a few buses are running about with fuel cells and from what I have read, not much is happening with them. The push is on here for pure EV with Batteries and recharging stations that you just drive over without plugging in ....

At the moment the buzz here is EV buses and trucks.. This is a Uni designed pure EV bus




















This uses the same in wheel motor system and chassis system as the Eliica did.











I do not see Honda running with the Fuel Cell car, at the moment all their money is going in to Hybrids .. The FCX was just a test vehicle and Honda has been playing with the FCX since 1999 with either Hydrogen, Methanol or Ultracapacitors and they still have not mass produced the car....So I would not be holding your breath waiting for a Fuel Cell car ....


----------



## NintendoKD (Apr 29, 2012)

now this is the meaty stuff, this is more or less what I was talking about, what is the large scale or long term effects of hydrogen use as a fuel. Thanks for that. is the juice worth the squeeze? all other things being equal, we gotta find another way. so if ev ain't the way, and hydrogen ain't the way, gas/petrol ain't eh way what is the way? compressed air?
http://www.gizmag.com/go/7000/


----------



## NintendoKD (Apr 29, 2012)

cool vid:


----------



## NintendoKD (Apr 29, 2012)

don't put much into the "ad perpetuum" at the end of the vid. Is there a future in this mix/hybrid of hydrogen fuel cell and an ev that is sustainable, low in overall pollution, and low in operation and production cost? I believe the answer may be a few years ahead of us. The same can be said for L-ion tech too.


----------



## NintendoKD (Apr 29, 2012)

Duncan said:


> To sum it up in a few less words NintendoKD is a loony and this should be moved to the perpetual motion thread


loony? no. mad? guilty as charged I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every darn minute of it. besides the hydrogen fuel cell is not a system "ad perpetuum" so, no.


----------



## NintendoKD (Apr 29, 2012)

Tatsushige said:


> Toyota and a few others here looked at fuel cells, a few buses are running about with fuel cells and from what I have read, not much is happening with them. The push is on here for pure EV with Batteries and recharging stations that you just drive over without plugging in ....
> 
> At the moment the buzz here is EV buses and trucks.. This is a Uni designed pure EV bus
> 
> ...


I was not keenly aware of the development of this by Honda since 99' this is interesting. you are correct, more Honda "bucks" are being spent in the hybrid bracket, it is more commercially viable for them, and obviously more lucrative.


----------



## Tatsushige (Mar 24, 2011)

NintendoKD said:


> now this is the meaty stuff, this is more or less what I was talking about, what is the large scale or long term effects of hydrogen use as a fuel. Thanks for that. is the juice worth the squeeze? all other things being equal, we gotta find another way. so if ev ain't the way, and hydrogen ain't the way, gas/petrol ain't eh way what is the way? compressed air?
> http://www.gizmag.com/go/7000/


 
EVs are the way, but BEV and not fuel cells ... as for compressed air, see that in the 70's and no chance on gods green earth will any car producer use it. Like it or not BEV are the way to go.


----------



## Tatsushige (Mar 24, 2011)

NintendoKD said:


> I was not keenly aware of the development of this by Honda since 99' this is interesting. you are correct, more Honda "bucks" are being spent in the hybrid bracket, it is more commercially viable for them, and obviously more lucrative.


Living in Japan and being able to read Japanese I know what the car makers here are doing or planing as I get to read it before idiots in the west translate it to English and fuck it up.


----------



## NintendoKD (Apr 29, 2012)

motainai desu ne!
what do you mean by BEV?


----------



## NintendoKD (Apr 29, 2012)

Tatsushige said:


> Living in Japan and being able to read Japanese I know what the car makers here are doing or planing as I get to read it before idiots in the west translate it to English and fuck it up.


Thanks, you make me feel so much better as a Gaijin who gives a darn.


----------



## Tatsushige (Mar 24, 2011)

NintendoKD said:


> motainai desu ne!
> what do you mean by BEV?


BEV = Battery Electric Vehicle.....and GAIJIN (外人) is racist. Please use the CORRECT term GAIKOKUJIN (外国人) Thank you!


I am an Australian living in Japan ...


----------



## NintendoKD (Apr 29, 2012)

Tatsushige said:


> BEV = Battery Electric Vehicle.....and GAIJIN (外人) is racist. Please use the CORRECT term GAIKOKUJIN (外国人) Thank you!
> 
> 
> I am an Australian living in Japan ...


even my wife calls me Gaijin, she is from Japan, not so much racist as you might believe, if you are black, you are black, if you are white, you are white, if you are a foreigner, well then, you are a foreigner. but I'll take what I can get. thanks


----------



## Tatsushige (Mar 24, 2011)

NintendoKD said:


> even my wife calls me Gaijin, she is from Japan, not so much racist as you might believe, if you are black, you are black, if you are white, you are white, if you are a foreigner, well then, you are a foreigner. but I'll take what I can get. thanks


Gaijin was used in EDO for people out side of EDO as a putdown. It was not meant for gaikokujin from other countries.


Gaijin = Out Person .. Gai meaning OUT and Jin meaning Person. ... A put down in Edo Japan

Gaikokujin = Other Countries Person ... Gaikoku meaning another country and Jin meaning Person.

If you study Japanese history you see it is like calling a African a ****** ... Uneducated Japanese use Gaijin because they do not know better, but say GAIJIN in front of a police officer and see what happens.

But this is off topic ....


----------

