Why not use electricity directly instead of hydrogen

[Algr]

ooops, are we too far away from the original topic (hydrogen)?

Could be. A new topic should start with some hard data though. Electrifying the highways is a small project compared to getting the highways build in the first place.

 

[mheslep]

Plug in hybrids and pure electrics benefit because range is extended on the highway, where it matters most.

How is that hybrids require any more range? How do they obtain any cost effective benefit from an increase beyond the current ~400 miles/tank of gas, which btw can be replenished in 4 minutes at any of a couple hundred thousand US filling stations?

Pure electrics would benefit, sure, but the very nature of the electric roads proposals shows the flaw in pure electrics, one that hybrids don't share.

 

[Algr]

How is that hybrids require any more range? How do they obtain any cost effective benefit from an increase

Because it costs less to run a hybrid from electricity than gas. Read up on the first coast-to-coast trip by car, and how hopelessly impractical it was compared to the trains that were available. No one looked at that and said cars are hopeless stick with trains. Instead we saw opportunities and build a highways system. That's how change happens.

 

[mheslep]

Because it costs less to run a hybrid from electricity than gas.

Not in this case. Yes, US electricity at 12¢/kWh or 4¢/EV-mile on the existing residence connected grid fed to an existing plug-in via cables is cheaper than gas per distance traveled (5¢/mile @40 mpg/$2/gallon). The cost of electrifying highways, adding induction loops to new plug-ins,and the losses of induction very probably make the total cost of highway electricity higher than gasoline. And so again, to what benefit, for the 5% or so of driving that's long distance?

It seems to me the only rationale would come from proving, via production experience, that pure EVs with large batteries are substantially cheaper than comparable dual drive train, hybrid vehicles. So far, that's not the case. Further, a cheaper than hybrid EV works only if some kind of adoption model manifests where EV owners are not inconvenienced in areas with no highway electrification. Other answers requiring people to change behavior for acceptance, i.e. "sell your car", are outside of market economics based solutions.

Read up on the first coast-to-coast trip by car,

I'm familiar.

and how hopelessly impractical it was compared to the trains that were available. No one looked at that and said cars are hopeless stick with trains. Instead we saw opportunities and build a highways system. That's how change happens.

That's not the history of the 1950s built highway system in the US, which was built for i) national defense reasons, and from ii) localized support for highway funding that stood to benefit from passing highway traffic.

Change has occurred in this case via hybrids.

 

[HyperTechno]

Since you brought the idea of electrified lanes, why don't you start a new thread on the matter so that we can discuss about it more broadly and freely.
Thanks.

 

[HyperTechno]

Could be. A new topic should start with some hard data though. Electrifying the highways is a small project compared to getting the highways build in the first place.

Since you brought the idea of electrified lanes, why don't you start a new thread on the matter so that we can discuss about it more broadly and freely.
Thanks.

 

[HyperTechno]

Hey there , I'd like to add my conclusion or , what I vision as the propulsion system of the future vehicles will be. . . . Well that will most unlikely be hydrogen , probably it will be pure electric . Why, consider the batteries vs HFC s. The history and the experience the human civilization has had with the batteries is far great than that of HFC s. And batteries are being used all over the world . In all kinds of mobile applications , backup systems, pure Evs and hybrids , rovers and drones and etc. Any advance in battery technology in any of these sectors can contribute to others . And a lot more is invested and are being invested in various types of battery technologies and many new battery technologies have discovered and are being developed . And also lithium battery technology too is being developed .http://feeds.sciencedaily.com/~r/sc...gy/fuel_cells/~3/zyuXLz7DBLc/161108114137.htm

http://feeds.sciencedaily.com/~r/sc...gy/fuel_cells/~3/LA0A4awnPNk/161026102701.htm

http://feeds.sciencedaily.com/~r/sc...gy/fuel_cells/~3/F7Od9oV8PbQ/161024104227.htm

http://feeds.sciencedaily.com/~r/sc...gy/fuel_cells/~3/_7URtdM7buw/161018194231.htm

http://feeds.sciencedaily.com/~r/sc...gy/fuel_cells/~3/A3p06raOCEo/160915090014.htm

Plus in another article that I've read (I couldn't find it on the net within the time I had to write this post sorry ) , There was a technology to improve the life time of the lithium batteries a lot . The researchers have practically tested that , 200000 (yes it's 200,000) recharge cycles within a month with only 0.23% of battery degradation . Impressive . Very impressive .
So with all these plus the vast infrastructure the pure Evs have relatively to HFCVs, I don't think there will be a good future for HFCV s. The only advantage they have is quick refilling . But that too is being obtained by the evolving battery technologies .