Toyota opens up hydrogen fuel cell patents

Nice I think this goes along with many of the recent press releases, with Toyota switching tact. A year ago toyota was claiming they were way ahead and that sales would be higher than we expected. Contrast that with this

that is quite a contrast to the earlier hubris. 100 years is a long way off. You don't kill plug-ins because you think 50 years from now hydrogen might be better.

 

Well, at least they're trying to move in the right direction with this.

But with the chicken and egg problem FCV's are facing regarding how to fill them up due to lack of hydrogen fuel infrastructure virtually everywhere aside from California and some East Coast areas, and the fact that they cost as much as a luxury car at the moment, it's going to be hard to convince the general public to embrace them.

 

I see on hybridcars.com that Toyota has announced Lexus FCVs . . . prefect match!

Bob Wilson

 

Did I miss something? When did Toyota say they are killing their plugins?

Now, GM, Ford, Nissan and others have no excuse for not following up with FCVs.

 

Other than:
Being less convenient?
Requiring very expensive investments in infrastructure, carried in large part by taxpayers?
Requiring expensive fuel?
Giving sub standard performance?

I do applaude Toyota for opening their patents (most for free until 2020) on hydrogen.
I don't suspect they have much the other guys don't already have.

 

Yes, for now. The technology is still being launched.

Almost everything on your list is true for using EV miles on my PiP (now that gas price is so low). Despite that, I still charge it because the gas engine is so inefficient with short trips (under 2 miles).

This is just the beginning. Opening up the patents is the right decision for the entire industry.

 

It's more than just chicken and egg. For starters there's the high cost of the vehicles ... no improvement on green-ness over a Prius ... the necessity of an endless supply of cheep fracked natural gas - all they got is an egg so far ... no chicken.
.

 

Well, name plugins that is greener than a Prius?

Hydrogen in California has higher percentage of renewable than the electricity there. H2, like electricity is not a primary fuel. It depends on how it is generated. Stop the silliness.

 

It's not a chicken and egg thing, it never has been. If all that was needed was a little government money to prime the pump, the $3B the US government has spent so far would have solved it. GM has spent $2.5B. I would hazzard to guess the Japanese government has spent almost $2B, toyota, honda, hyundai, mercedes, germany, and korea have been big spenders too.

The problem is promised miracles haven't happened. That is tehnical breakthrough have not happened. Given enough time and money these miracles will likely happen, and fuel cells first promised to have them by 2020 with millions of cars in california by then. I'm glad toyota is finally admitting that is not going to happen tomorrow. Its going to take more than a decade to just bring costs of the fuel cell stack and 10,000 psi hydrogen down. By that time methanol or metal hydryde hydrogen may be the fuel of choice nnd all fueling infrastructure is at risk.

No they said they don't see a reason to built them. That they are disapointing. That no one wants them. They put out false and misleading information in PR and in lexus informercials against plug ins. They told carb bevs would never sell. Don't play dumb.

GM and Honda have s partnershp with a lot more patents than Toyota. Honda is going to have a car out in 2016 that it is planning to lose money on. I'm guessing GM's reason for being later is they already wasted $2.5B on fuel cells, so they can wait to see how honda does, before losing a lot more. The next gen clarity maybe ahead of the mirai, given honda/gm experience, but won' sell many vehicles.

Ford, Nissan, and Mercedes are in anouther partnership, and are watching the f-cell. Ford and Nissan will wait on findings from Mercedes.

Why should these companies rush out to build these fcv, when technology is not there yet. Parts are much too expensive today to sell as well as the volt, ford energi's, leaf. They are concentrating more on next generations of those cars and longer range bevs.

Maybe the open patents, will get a group to build say 20,000 fuel cell stacks and tanks and share them amoung all the automakers. Each could then have cheaper parts to build a desirable vehicle. As it is now toyota has built a lexus hs, with a missing middle back seat and smaller trunk, no leather, that runs on hard to find fuel, and costs $50K in california. At that price toyota and the state of california lose money on every one sold. How many people want that more than a prius, or a leaf, or volt, or tesla S? Even Toyota does not think many, 3000 in the next 3 years cumulative for the US. The leaf, that if you write off R&D, is profitable to nissan, this with lower US taxpayer subsidies per car, sold over 30,000 leafs in the US just last year. Why would Nissan rush to get out a fcv?

 

stop indeed - "H2, like electricity is not a primary fuel" may sound cutesy - but all it does is hide the fact that you can make electricity via PV solar to charge in your garage and the equipment pays for itself over time. Call me when your garage version H2 refinery & compressor are up and running ... oh, and NOT paid for by taxpayers in a near bankrupt state.

.

 

I don't know if this link will work for everyone, but the upshot of the article is basically this: "The problem was always, can you make hydrogen fuel at a price point that makes any sense to anybody. And the answer to that to date has been 'no'.”

Hydrogen highway hits dead end

 

It comes through fine.

Since the article it has tanked ADRs selling for $1.77 today. I would say with toyota releasing their fuel cell patents its even less likely that Mercedes/Ford/Nissan group buys ballard, but who knows its so cheap now.at only $235 million, that is less than 10% of what GM spent on R&D.

10,000 psi hydrogen is too expensive in the US, but maybe not in Japan. Methanol is not too expensive, but then you need a methanol reformer onboard too, adding to the cost of the car.

Perhaps this coming to terms has something to do with Toyota's partner BMW
BMW Continues Down Hydrogen Fuel Cell Development Path - Production Timetable Uncertain

 

I'm not sure 10,000 psi hydrogen storage will always be a barrier; there are many other storage methods. However, the inescapable fact is that you can't drill a well and get liquid hydrogen. Until someone invents a cheaper source of hydrogen, we're stuck with petroleum.

 

+1

We can make hydrogen from natural gas in the US at larger facilities for $2/kg. The problem is then you need to distribute it to the stations. Trucks are specialty but less expensive than pipelines per kg expected. To truck it you need special cryogenic trucks, and also to liquify and some hydrogen leaks, add $1.00 for liquification and transportaion (its actually much more but maybe they can plug leaks). The newest station in california for trucked in hydrogen can handle 70 cars, 350kg a day and cost $2.5M. Taxpayers picked up $1.5M of that tab and operating expenses at the begining. Say it operates at 70% capacity for 10 years that is 894,250. Divide it from the million and you get $1.12/kg, so we are at $4.12/kg just to break even after subsidies. Think about what happens when the state stops subsides, and you actually have to pay for electricity and employees, and maintenance, it is more like $7/kg and the ghg ends up being higher than a hybrid per mile of similar vehicle. Now add that we need to have at least 33% renewable hydrogen at $13/kg and things just can't add up.
NorCal’s 1st public hydrogen fueling station opens in West Sacramento | The Sacramento Bee
http://cafcp.org/sites/files/West-Sacramento_H2-Station-profile.pdf

If you get metal hydrides to work though that station gets much less expensive, the trucking cost also drop a great deal. I don't know if metal hydrides are practical (long enough tank life, low enough weight for cars and trucks.[/QUOTE]

 

Just calling out the drama queen.

Or you can generate electricity from fuel cell.

H2 vs Electron generation pathways are different topic. Some pathways are better for H2 and some better for electrons. Yes, electricity now has better pathway with solar panels. It doesn't mean you have to be anti-hydrogen. How about supporting it, as it can be as clean as EVs.

Per NREL, H2 should cost about $6 per kg (with Compression, Storage, and Dispensing). That's in line with Toyota's Bob Carter said. If Mirai is rated 60 MPGe, it will go 60 miles on it. Not as economical as 50 MPG Prius but it is a good start. As it ramps up with mass production, the price can only go lower.

NREL: Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Research - Hydrogen Production Cost Analysis

 

not trying to be dramatic at all. I really do hope toyota has stopped its anti-plug-in tactics now that it is admitting that the fcv will not take over the world in the near future. I do hope they provide enough engineering resources to the prius phv and actually roll it out to other states at some time in the near future. I do hope akido toyoda does get control of his board chairman.

DOE is pouring research money into splitting water catylitically using sunlight and electricity to drive the reaction. Until they get that miracle though, home hydrogen fueling is prohibitively expensive. Even just the compressors to fill your tank to 10,000 psi at home would cost more than solar panels, grid hook up, inverters, and a garage charging station. Renewable 10,000psi hydrogen unsubsidized (other than federal solar panel subsidy of 30% or wind subsidy of $0.02/kwh) is around $13/kg. In a 150,000 mile vehicle that gets 62 miles/kg @$6.50/kg hydrogen (half renewable price) its $15,726 to fuel. If a plug-in is paying $0.15/kwh for renewables (they are much cheaper here, solar pv in la was about 0.14 in 2012 and is less expensive now) then a plug-in could go twice the distance on that money.

 

With all due respect, at the lower-end, the plug-in market is only for a small demographic, who travel less than 60 miles per day, and to be quite honest, a bicycle would serve that group almost as well. At the high-end of the plug-in market is also a small demographic who don't mind paying 5 times as much for a car which is better suited for recreational driving than for everyday use. For the big fat middle of the bell-curve, where most of us live, a plug-in isn't really an economically-viable option.

Kudos to Toyota for understanding that.

 

Nor sure what demographic you have in your area. In mine, 60 miles a day meets a muc her larger portion of the market than more than 60 miles/day.

And it fits a much larger section of the market than those that live within 6 miles (isn't that the limit Toyota is imposing) of a hydrogen fueling station and have $50,000 to spare.
You could buy 2.5 Leafs at that price.

 

In my city, the chances are not very favorable for living and working in the same area, therefore long commutes are more the rule than the exception around here. If I were dead-set on plugging-in, I'd get a Volt or a Leaf, but as it stands, I am free of charge-station-anxiety with my Plug-in Prius, however I can take advantage of it wherever it's available.