BMW 1 Series Coupe Forum / 1 Series Convertible Forum (1M / tii / 135i / 128i / Coupe / Cabrio / Hatchback) (BMW E82 E88 128i 130i 135i)
 





 

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      03-30-2020, 06:18 PM   #23
F32Fleet
Lieutenant General
F32Fleet's Avatar
United_States
3525
Rep
10,300
Posts

Drives: 2015 435i
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Southeastern US

iTrader: (0)

Waste of time and resources. This is just a means of delaying the inevitable sunsetting of the ICE for passenger cars. I only say this because creating hydrogen in quantities needed is highly polluting and the gas leaks out of the vehicle's tank (Hydrogen 7 some 15 yrs ago would go empty in about a week).
__________________
"Drive more, worry less. "

435i, MPPK, MPE, M-Sport Line
Appreciate 1
///M TOWN13003.00
      03-30-2020, 06:33 PM   #24
TheBingoBalls
Brigadier General
TheBingoBalls's Avatar
Canada
3799
Rep
4,653
Posts

Drives: BMW
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Toronto, Ontario

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
Waste of time and resources. This is just a means of delaying the inevitable sunsetting of the ICE for passenger cars. I only say this because creating hydrogen in quantities needed is highly polluting and the gas leaks out of the vehicle's tank (Hydrogen 7 some 15 yrs ago would go empty in about a week).
I agree. I am not too educated on hydrogen tech and it's application in vehicles but if the end game is electric, why bother investing R&D into hydrogen? What is the long play here and if you're a prospective buyer of a non-ICE BMW, are you even looking at hydrogen instead of just going electric? It doesn't make sense to me.

I get that BMW doesn't think the infrastructure is ready but I think there's far more value in just continually working with electric than hydrogen as a very temporary stop gap.
Appreciate 2
///M TOWN13003.00
Canuck335148.00
      03-30-2020, 06:48 PM   #25
SteveinArizona
Brigadier General
United_States
3086
Rep
4,210
Posts

Drives: BMW 530e
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Greater Phoenix

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBingoBalls View Post
I agree. I am not too educated on hydrogen tech and it's application in vehicles but if the end game is electric, why bother investing R&D into hydrogen? What is the long play here and if you're a prospective buyer of a non-ICE BMW, are you even looking at hydrogen instead of just going electric? It doesn't make sense to me.

I get that BMW doesn't think the infrastructure is ready but I think there's far more value in just continually working with electric than hydrogen as a very temporary stop gap.
Hydrogen IS electric. The only difference is whether one uses batteries (which need to be regularly charged) or hyrdrogen (which needs to be regularly replenished) to run the electric motor.

Hydrogen is the endgame. It is just a question of how long it will take to get there.
Appreciate 2
530iDriver1707.50
mkoesel7505.50
      03-30-2020, 06:55 PM   #26
GerryM5
Second Lieutenant
GerryM5's Avatar
United_States
250
Rep
257
Posts

Drives: BMW M2C
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Los Gatos, CA, USA

iTrader: (0)

FYI, Hydrogen may not be the fuel for future cars but there are 20+ fuel station SF Bay Area.
__________________
M2C 2019
135is Dinan S2
E60 M5
E39 M5 Dinan S2
E34 M5 Dinan S1
Appreciate 0
      03-30-2020, 07:32 PM   #27
SEAT TIME RULES
Major
SEAT TIME RULES's Avatar
1092
Rep
1,260
Posts

Drives: 20 BMW M2C 17 Mazda MX-5 RF
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: "Get Busy Living, or Get busy Dying"

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2020 BMW M2C  [5.00]
Its coming, and its going to replace batteries in the not to distant future...

https://www.furosystems.com/news/hyd...tric-vehicles/

They have just started to apply some serious R&D to the limitations that are holding back its growth.
__________________
2005-2006 BMWCCA Boston Chapter president
2004 Mazda Rev It Up Finalist
2002-Present HPDE Instructor
My 2020M2C Build: https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh....php?t=1696726
Appreciate 1
530iDriver1707.50
      03-30-2020, 08:33 PM   #28
Dog Face Pony Soldier
2006 TIME Person Of The Year
Dog Face Pony Soldier's Avatar
United_States
9720
Rep
6,445
Posts

Drives: M Sport 335i
Join Date: May 2013
Location: North Jersey

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2014 335i  [9.74]
Adding FCEVs to the marketplace seems more realistic than trying to cram the entire world into BEVs. The energy-to-weight ratio, all-climate range stability, and rapid refueling are all very attractive qualities. Now if only BMW could erase the memories of the Hindenburg disaster.

__________________
Appreciate 0
      03-30-2020, 08:49 PM   #29
SamS
Banned
United_States
866
Rep
6,248
Posts

Drives: Tesla M3 Perf + '18 X3 M40i
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Dallas, TX

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveinArizona View Post
Hydrogen IS electric. The only difference is whether one uses batteries (which need to be regularly charged) or hyrdrogen (which needs to be regularly replenished) to run the electric motor.

Hydrogen is the endgame. It is just a question of how long it will take to get there.
Hydrogen is not the endgame. The physics behind it dictate that it needs more volume than batteries, to produce the same amount of energy.

Do you really expect people to have hydrogen in their garage? Everyone has electricity there. Sure, you may need some ‘upgrades’. But that’s a few thousand dollars and a qualified electrician. Not an ‘explosive gas line’ upgrade.
Appreciate 3
///M TOWN13003.00
David701567.00
Canuck335148.00
      03-30-2020, 08:50 PM   #30
SamS
Banned
United_States
866
Rep
6,248
Posts

Drives: Tesla M3 Perf + '18 X3 M40i
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Dallas, TX

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SEAT TIME RULES View Post
Its coming, and its going to replace Electric in the not to distant future...

https://www.furosystems.com/news/hyd...tric-vehicles/

They have just started to apply some serious R&D to the limitations that are holding back its growth.
Did you even read that link?

Other issues are that storing hydrogen as a gas is expensive and energy intensive, sometimes as much as half the energy it contains, and even more so when it is stored as a liquid at cryogenic temperatures. In addition, it is highly flammable, tends to escape containment and reacts with metals in a way than renders them more brittle and prone to breakage. Eventually, although it is everywhere around us, hydrogen is hard, dangerous and expensive to produce, store and transport.

^^^ That’s a bit more serious than “limitations” that some R&D dollars will fix.
Appreciate 1
David701567.00
      03-30-2020, 08:50 PM   #31
///M TOWN
.
///M TOWN's Avatar
13003
Rep
8,275
Posts

Drives: M GmbH
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: North America

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2018 M2  [8.77]
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamS View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveinArizona View Post
Hydrogen IS electric. The only difference is whether one uses batteries (which need to be regularly charged) or hyrdrogen (which needs to be regularly replenished) to run the electric motor.

Hydrogen is the endgame. It is just a question of how long it will take to get there.
Hydrogen is not the endgame. The physics behind it dictate that it needs more volume than batteries, to produce the same amount of energy.

Do you really expect people to have hydrogen in their garage? Everyone has electricity there. Sure, you may need some 'upgrades'. But that's a few thousand dollars and a qualified electrician. Not an 'explosive gas line' upgrade.
SamS... You absolutely nailed it ‼️
__________________
///
Appreciate 0
      03-30-2020, 10:41 PM   #32
SEAT TIME RULES
Major
SEAT TIME RULES's Avatar
1092
Rep
1,260
Posts

Drives: 20 BMW M2C 17 Mazda MX-5 RF
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: "Get Busy Living, or Get busy Dying"

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2020 BMW M2C  [5.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamS View Post
Did you even read that link?

Other issues are that storing hydrogen as a gas is expensive and energy intensive, sometimes as much as half the energy it contains, and even more so when it is stored as a liquid at cryogenic temperatures. In addition, it is highly flammable, tends to escape containment and reacts with metals in a way than renders them more brittle and prone to breakage. Eventually, although it is everywhere around us, hydrogen is hard, dangerous and expensive to produce, store and transport.

^^^ That’s a bit more serious than “limitations” that some R&D dollars will fix.
Let me explain my thinking...

How long has the auto industry been working on battery storage, hybrid tech and pure electric? ~20 years.

Hydrogen has yet to have anywhere near the capital & time invested in it. Its literally just starting to see R&D $'s and time increase in the last few years.

I'm all in on Hydrogen. Many of todays hurdles will be easier to solve than squeezing much more out of chemical batteries.
__________________
2005-2006 BMWCCA Boston Chapter president
2004 Mazda Rev It Up Finalist
2002-Present HPDE Instructor
My 2020M2C Build: https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh....php?t=1696726
Appreciate 1
mkoesel7505.50
      03-30-2020, 11:21 PM   #33
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
7506
Rep
19,370
Posts

Drives: No BMW for now
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
Waste of time and resources. This is just a means of delaying the inevitable sunsetting of the ICE for passenger cars.
This is not a hydrogen combustion vehicle, so it will do nothing to delay the ICE phase-out. In fact, it could theoretically accelerate it since some ICE applications like long-distance heavy-duty transport could have their time-to-electrification shortened by hydrogen fuel cell commercialization.

Quote:
I only say this because creating hydrogen in quantities needed is highly polluting and the gas leaks out of the vehicle's tank (Hydrogen 7 some 15 yrs ago would go empty in about a week).
That was a hydrogen combustion vehicle. BMW is not currently pursuing that technology. They are pursuing FCEV technology along with many other players in the industry. Large sums of money are being invested and it’s unlikely to result in zero advancement.

When you blow by those eighteen wheelers on the expressway pumping out tons of NOx, you might wonder when that will end. Maybe a huge battery, right? Like 200kWh, or 300kWh, or even 500kWh? Sure, but then you're idle for four or five hours charging it, even with DC charging. And how many DC charge cycles will that battery endure before it’s spent? So that’s a massive cost-center, and it potentially creates the new issue of increasing fleet idle time. But what if there were a way to instead use a refillable battery that could be ready to go again in just a few minutes and never wear out? Enter the fuel cell. And yes, that needs refinement, transport, and infrastructure which is also a massive cost-center. So who wins? The industry is hedging on both. If you think you know the answer, invest you hard earned $$ in BEV and short the FCEV suppliers.

What does this have to do with BMW? They can sell or license the tech. But also, when the coastal me-too crew gets wind of those big rigs with refillable batteries, they are going to demand it in their X7 or X8 or iX. Or maybe not. Like I say, if you think you’re crystal ball is better than that, you know where to put your money. Fuel cells or batteries - who wins in the end? It does not have to be winner take all. It’s about covering every use case so that electric propulsion can proliferate to all types of vehicles and we get to zero tailpipe.
Appreciate 5
      03-31-2020, 05:58 AM   #34
Kjenndal
New Member
Kjenndal's Avatar
Germany
10
Rep
22
Posts

Drives: -
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Deutschland

iTrader: (0)

Regarding cars it's a waste of green electricity!

https://www.volkswagenag.com/en/news...-question.html
Appreciate 1
David701567.00
      03-31-2020, 06:22 AM   #35
hans007
Major
604
Rep
1,077
Posts

Drives: 2020 BMW M340i
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveinArizona View Post
Hydrogen IS electric. The only difference is whether one uses batteries (which need to be regularly charged) or hyrdrogen (which needs to be regularly replenished) to run the electric motor.

Hydrogen is the endgame. It is just a question of how long it will take to get there.
Yes it an FCEV. People make it seem like a company like toyota which doesn't have a lithium ion EV doesn't need to know how to build an EV at all when they'd been making the mirai for years. That hydrogen tank and fuel cell stack, can be replaced by a pile of batteries from LG chem or whatever which i'm sure is basically what an i4 is. BMW needs to hedge its bets they need to be prepared in case this also has a market. I'd imagine the electric parts are basically the same too. A smart company is still going to keep their options open.

I had a coworker who actually had a mirai a couple years ago and it worked fine, it was just a matter of number of stations in Los angeles but you could make it work. If hydrogen takes off and theres more stations then who knows. Hydrogen for the range probably weighs less than lithium batteries... the current gen mirai is 4000 lbs and 5 series sized (the fuel cell stack above was codeveloped with toyota.... so who knows maybe there could be a fuel cell 5 series too). the 2021 mirai is similar sized and even RWD supposedly 400 mile range. Its a lot lighter than say a taycan or a model s for the size

Last edited by hans007; 03-31-2020 at 06:36 AM..
Appreciate 0
      03-31-2020, 06:44 AM   #36
F32Fleet
Lieutenant General
F32Fleet's Avatar
United_States
3525
Rep
10,300
Posts

Drives: 2015 435i
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Southeastern US

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SEAT TIME RULES View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamS View Post
Did you even read that link?

Other issues are that storing hydrogen as a gas is expensive and energy intensive, sometimes as much as half the energy it contains, and even more so when it is stored as a liquid at cryogenic temperatures. In addition, it is highly flammable, tends to escape containment and reacts with metals in a way than renders them more brittle and prone to breakage. Eventually, although it is everywhere around us, hydrogen is hard, dangerous and expensive to produce, store and transport.

^^^ That's a bit more serious than "limitations" that some R&D dollars will fix.
Let me explain my thinking...

How long has the auto industry been working on battery storage, hybrid tech and pure electric? ~20 years.

Hydrogen has yet to have anywhere near the capital & time invested in it. Its literally just starting to see R&D $'s and time increase in the last few years.

I'm all in on Hydrogen. Many of todays hurdles will be easier to solve than squeezing much more out of chemical batteries.
Toyota Prius and Honda Insight around 2000.
BMW Hydrogen 7 circa 2005.

Hydrogen, unlike battery technology, is comparatively well understood so you can't just assume that throwing more time and money will change what is already known.

The limitations of hydrogen are a result of its physical properties which will never change. Burning NatGas (Methane) would've been the natural successor to gasoline from an air quality perspective and that technology has remained on the fringes for some 20 odd years.

Basically it's all about weight, energy density of the fuel, and ease of use. Hydrogen, Methane are simply not good candidates for vehicles.


BTW...Tesla (via Panasonic) is supposedly coming out with new battery tech which will significantly reduce weight. Batteries are where the money is at. It's not about engines or anything else which is why legacy car companies will become shells of their former selves.

Basically imagine BMW, Porsche, Benz, Ford buying their engines from a third party supplier like Bosch/ZF
__________________
"Drive more, worry less. "

435i, MPPK, MPE, M-Sport Line
Appreciate 0
      03-31-2020, 06:50 AM   #37
F32Fleet
Lieutenant General
F32Fleet's Avatar
United_States
3525
Rep
10,300
Posts

Drives: 2015 435i
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Southeastern US

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
Waste of time and resources. This is just a means of delaying the inevitable sunsetting of the ICE for passenger cars.
This is not a hydrogen combustion vehicle, so it will do nothing to delay the ICE phase-out. In fact, it could theoretically accelerate it since some ICE applications like long-distance heavy-duty transport could have their time-to-electrification shortened by hydrogen fuel cell commercialization.

Quote:
I only say this because creating hydrogen in quantities needed is highly polluting and the gas leaks out of the vehicle's tank (Hydrogen 7 some 15 yrs ago would go empty in about a week).
That was a hydrogen combustion vehicle. BMW is not currently pursuing that technology. They are pursuing FCEV technology along with many other players in the industry. Large sums of money are being invested and it's unlikely to result in zero advancement.

When you blow by those eighteen wheelers on the expressway pumping out tons of NOx, you might wonder when that will end. Maybe a huge battery, right? Like 200kWh, or 300kWh, or even 500kWh? Sure, but then you're idle for four or five hours charging it, even with DC charging. And how many DC charge cycles will that battery endure before it's spent? So that's a massive cost-center, and it potentially creates the new issue of increasing fleet idle time. But what if there were a way to instead use a refillable battery that could be ready to go again in just a few minutes and never wear out? Enter the fuel cell. And yes, that needs refinement, transport, and infrastructure which is also a massive cost-center. So who wins? The industry is hedging on both. If you think you know the answer, invest you hard earned $$ in BEV and short the FCEV suppliers.

What does this have to do with BMW? They can sell or license the tech. But also, when the coastal me-too crew gets wind of those big rigs with refillable batteries, they are going to demand it in their X7 or X8 or iX. Or maybe not. Like I say, if you think you're crystal ball is better than that, you know where to put your money. Fuel cells or batteries - who wins in the end? It does not have to be winner take all. It's about covering every use case so that electric propulsion can proliferate to all types of vehicles and we get to zero tailpipe.
Commercial OTR trucks will never use batteries. The weight penalty is just too high. They will always use diesel as a primary fuel.

Hydrogen fuel cell, never happen.

BTW It still burns hydrogen stored in tanks. Same limitations apply.


Oh and one more thing. Here's a telltale sign of why it will never happen. From the article,
"In our view, hydrogen as energy carrier must first be produced in sufficient quantities at a competitive price using green electricity"

I'm going to unpack this. Basically BMW has acknowledged that because generating hydrogen is highly polluting, they're trying to use as little as possible per vehicle in anticipation of the low quantities of hydrogen which are available using price competitive "green electricity".
__________________
"Drive more, worry less. "

435i, MPPK, MPE, M-Sport Line
Appreciate 0
      03-31-2020, 08:52 AM   #38
Dog Face Pony Soldier
2006 TIME Person Of The Year
Dog Face Pony Soldier's Avatar
United_States
9720
Rep
6,445
Posts

Drives: M Sport 335i
Join Date: May 2013
Location: North Jersey

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2014 335i  [9.74]
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamS View Post
Hydrogen is not the endgame. The physics behind it dictate that it needs more volume than batteries, to produce the same amount of energy.
Funny you tout that advantage. I'm not sure you're on the right side of the facts...

Hydrogen used in fuel cells has an energy to weight ratio ten times greater than lithium-ion batteries. Consequently, it offers much greater range while being lighter and occupying smaller volumes.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SamS View Post
Do you really expect people to have hydrogen in their garage? Everyone has electricity there. Sure, you may need some 'upgrades'. But that's a few thousand dollars and a qualified electrician. Not an 'explosive gas line' upgrade.
No. With refueling hydrogen being so quick, the number of people installing hydrogen refueling stations in their home would be about the same as people installing gasoline refueling stations in their home. The point is quick, public hydrogen refueling works for people that find charging an EV at home impossible. Plus, your scenario points out a "few thousand dollar" disadvantage EVs have.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      03-31-2020, 09:53 AM   #39
SteveinArizona
Brigadier General
United_States
3086
Rep
4,210
Posts

Drives: BMW 530e
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Greater Phoenix

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dog Face Pony Soldier View Post
Funny you tout that advantage. I'm not sure you're on the right side of the facts...

Hydrogen used in fuel cells has an energy to weight ratio ten times greater than lithium-ion batteries. Consequently, it offers much greater range while being lighter and occupying smaller volumes.



No. With refueling hydrogen being so quick, the number of people installing hydrogen refueling stations in their home would be about the same as people installing gasoline refueling stations in their home. The point is quick, public hydrogen refueling works for people that find charging an EV at home impossible. Plus, your scenario points out a "few thousand dollar" disadvantage EVs have.
Exactly. Storing hydrogen fuel in a home will be as common as storing gasoline in a home. has the poster stored gasoline in garage and does his refueling from there? I somehow doubt it.
Appreciate 0
      03-31-2020, 10:44 AM   #40
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
7506
Rep
19,370
Posts

Drives: No BMW for now
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
Commercial OTR trucks will never use batteries. The weight penalty is just too high. They will always use diesel as a primary fuel.

Hydrogen fuel cell, never happen.
Fantastic. You've obviously got all the answers, so why waste time here defending this inevitable reality? Go short every player in the hydrogen game. It's a sure thing, and you'll rake in millions.
Appreciate 0
      03-31-2020, 11:35 AM   #41
SamS
Banned
United_States
866
Rep
6,248
Posts

Drives: Tesla M3 Perf + '18 X3 M40i
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Dallas, TX

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dog Face Pony Soldier View Post
Funny you tout that advantage. I'm not sure you're on the right side of the facts...

Hydrogen used in fuel cells has an energy to weight ratio ten times greater than lithium-ion batteries. Consequently, it offers much greater range while being lighter and occupying smaller volumes.
There are many studies that conclude that a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle uses 2-3x the energy to drive the same distance vs. BEV. Volkswagen has a very thorough study published driven by data:
https://www.volkswagenag.com/en/news...-question.html


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dog Face Pony Soldier View Post
No. With refueling hydrogen being so quick, the number of people installing hydrogen refueling stations in their home would be about the same as people installing gasoline refueling stations in their home. The point is quick, public hydrogen refueling works for people that find charging an EV at home impossible. Plus, your scenario points out a "few thousand dollar" disadvantage EVs have.
You assume that hydrogen fueling stations will be as ubiquitous as gasoline stations. Even today, electric car fueling stations are nowhere near that, as such fueling will have be augmented somewhere i.e. your home. Ask anyone who has experienced the convenience of "refueling" at home... there is no joy in going to a gas station. Plugging in overnight and waking up to 100% range when you want to is a terrific convenience.
Appreciate 1
Soterios575.00
      03-31-2020, 01:04 PM   #42
Dog Face Pony Soldier
2006 TIME Person Of The Year
Dog Face Pony Soldier's Avatar
United_States
9720
Rep
6,445
Posts

Drives: M Sport 335i
Join Date: May 2013
Location: North Jersey

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2014 335i  [9.74]
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamS View Post
There are many studies that conclude that a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle uses 2-3x the energy to drive the same distance vs. BEV. Volkswagen has a very thorough study published driven by data:
https://www.volkswagenag.com/en/news...-question.html
Although it sounds like you've made your mind up already; to me, it sounds like it would be interesting to see people weigh their options... A FCEV using 2-3x more energy (includes losses at the production level) to drive the same distance; versus having 10x(!) advantage of energy-to-weight over BEV, with much greater range, and all-climate range stability. Additionally, what type of refueling works for them... A homeowner charging at their home; or a rental/apartment dweller filling the tank at a local hydrogen refueling station.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamS View Post
You assume that hydrogen fueling stations will be as ubiquitous as gasoline stations. Even today, electric car fueling stations are nowhere near that, as such fueling will have to be augmented somewhere i.e. your home. Ask anyone who has experienced the convenience of "refueling" at home... there is no joy in going to a gas station. Plugging in overnight and waking up to 100% range when you want to is a terrific convenience.
The failure in your assumption is that every buyer CAN charge at home. As a life-long NY-Metro resident, this seems like an obvious glaring omission. I guess I should give this a pass because some people just can't grasp this concept... But it is very real. There are literally millions of Metro-NY residents that will never have an ability to charge at their home. Further, many NYC residents mainly rely on mass transit, so they only buy a single car that is mostly used for extended trips. These buyers would be greatly motivated to stay in an ICE vehicle. I see the FCEV as a potentially-realistic option for them.

I see this as one of those situations where more options are better. The BEV devotees shouldn't feel threatened, as I see FCEVs as mostly picking away ICE buyers.
__________________

Last edited by Dog Face Pony Soldier; 03-31-2020 at 01:16 PM..
Appreciate 1
KRS_SN13034.50
      03-31-2020, 01:12 PM   #43
SamS
Banned
United_States
866
Rep
6,248
Posts

Drives: Tesla M3 Perf + '18 X3 M40i
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Dallas, TX

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dog Face Pony Soldier View Post
Although it sounds like you've made your mind up already; to me, it sounds like it would be interesting to see people weigh their options... A FCEV using 2-3x more energy (includes losses at the production level) to drive the same distance; versus having 10x(!) advantage of energy-to-weight over BEV, with much greater range, and all-climate range stability. Additionally, what type of refueling works for them... A homeowner charging at their home; or a rental/apartment dweller filling the tank at a local hydrogen refueling station.


The failure in your assumption is that every buyer CAN charge at home. As a life-long NY-Metro resident, this seems like an obvious glaring omission. I guess I should give this a pass because some people just can't grasp this concept... But it is very real. There are literally millions of Metro-NY residents that will never have an ability to charge at their home. Further, many NYC residents mainly rely on mass transit, so they only buy a single car that is mostly used for extended trips. These buyers would be greatly motivated to stay in an ICE vehicle. I see the FCEV a potentially-realistic option for them.

I see this as one of those situations where more options are better. The BEV devotees shouldn't feel threatened, as I see FCEVs as mostly picking away ICE buyers.
I can appreciate having as many options as possible. Although I do (did!) take mass transit for part of my commute, your driving patterns are certainly different than mine.

I welcome any type of technology that is more sustainable than gas/diesel. But over the past several years, I've just taken a more pragmatic view regarding the alternatives available today, or in the next couple of years.

As someone who has bought four brand new BMWs over the past 8 years, I'm sure BMW would love to have me as a future BEV or Fuel Cell vehicle customer. But until they step up their game, and/or there are serious infrastructure changes, I've got better alternatives than what BMW offers/envisions.
Appreciate 0
      03-31-2020, 01:14 PM   #44
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
7506
Rep
19,370
Posts

Drives: No BMW for now
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

iTrader: (1)



https://www.motorauthority.com/news/...range-extender
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:17 AM.




1addicts
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST