Ran out of gas but depleted battery got me home

[eray1066]

Usually I am good to my machines. However last month I behaved badly with my 2018 Outlander PHEV. I had a Zoom board meeting and left our Farm for home without any time to spare. I was towing a trailer with a small load of firewood (about 1200 lbs gross). The gas gauge showed me it would be close. on a long gentle uphill grade about 1/4 mile from home the gas engine quit. The battery which had charged on most of the 50 mile trip was depleted as well on the screen. However the car limped up the hill (very slowly, 4mph?) on battery alone and into my driveway with a minute to spare. I am not proud of this but am in awe of the ability of the Outlander to get the job done. I put some gas in it and charged it during my meeting. I filled it with gas and charged it overnight. There have been no repercussions from this abuse.

 

[mellobob]

Cool to know. Hope I don't see the same thing

Living in a rural area I would be so afraid to own a pure EV. Run out of "gas" in one of those an expensive tow is the only option. At least with the PHEV you can still put a gallon of gasoline in and make it home or to a charge point. With all the chatter about going "all green" these days I wonder what's going to happen in rural areas? On the other hand, if I lived in an urban place I'd be looking seriously at an EV.

 

[ChrisMiller]

An increasing number of breakdown trucks are carrying large batteries that can be used to provide enough charge to get an 'empty' EV to the nearest charging point.

 

[mellobob]

An increasing number of breakdown trucks are carrying large batteries that can be used to provide enough charge to get an 'empty' EV to the nearest charging point.

Were are you seeing this? It's a good idea. What would it take, time wise, to do this much charge?

 

[ChrisMiller]

It's beginning in the UK, but on our motorways you probably only need about a 10 mile range boost to get you to the next services, where there should be a charging point. I'm not sure how well this concept would work on the prairies.

 

[mellobob]

It's beginning in the UK, but on our motorways you probably only need about a 10 mile range boost to get you to the next services, where there should be a charging point. I'm not sure how well this concept would work on the prairies.

In most places 10 miles doesn't even change the view I think I'll be driving a hybrid for many years to come.

 

[greendwarf]

However, there is nowhere in the world where electricity is not already available, which is why fuel cells are NOT the future. :mrgreen:

 

[littlescrote]

However, there is nowhere in the world where electricity is not already available, which is why fuel cells are NOT the future. :mrgreen:

I would change that to " fuel cells are not THE future" - they are definitely a part of the future, along with batteries and synthetic fuel ICE.

 

[ThudnBlundr]

Only where energy is plentiful and cheap - a fuel-cell car is around 40% efficient when you look at energy out of the power station to energy actually driving the car. Compare that to a BEV with 80% efficiency over the same measure. That means you need double the extra generation capacity for a fuel cell cars compared to BEVs for the same mileage. Who's going to pay for all that extra capacity just so it can be wasted? Add in an ICE running on e-fuels (maximum 30% efficient on its own, usually far less) to that lossy hydrogen infrastructure and the lossy conversion to e-fuels and you'd need at least 4-5 times the extra generation capacity if you want to use them. That's why hydrogen will only ever be a niche fuel unless there's some breakthrough.

Of course you can make hydrogen more easily from natural gas, but then it becomes a fossil fuel

 

[greendwarf]

The real problem with fuel cells is the infrastructure needed. Electricity is already universal and can be generated easily from a variety of local sources. Petrol and diesel are produced as part of an existing worldwide petrochemical industry and very cheap (before taxes). It can also be stored and transported without special containers (shades of some Covid vaccines!). At least early motoring pioneers could buy petrol from hardware stores in the small quantities sold for pre-existing other uses - try buying liquid hydrogen in the wilds of Sarf London!

Until there are significant alternative uses for hydrogen even the industry producing it will remain uneconomically small and nobody is going spend money on the complex new infrastructure that would encourage take up of vehicles powered by fuel cells. Its like the pipedream of unlimited free energy from fusion or Betamax. :lol:

NB. Younger readers might need to google the last word to understand my point.

 

[littlescrote]

You both have personal views that are not shared by many global corporations that have a lot more to lose than you do.

 

[greendwarf]

History is littered with businesses that "get it wrong" - I repeat, Betamax. This was a technically better product but that didn't help it survive. :ugeek:

 

[ThudnBlundr]

You both have personal views that are not shared by many global corporations that have a lot more to lose than you do.

It will be interesting watching "global corporations" defying the laws of physics :roll:

You say it's a "personal view", but it's just plain facts. Unless my sources have all got it wrong and you can prove my facts are actually incorrect. You'll be saying the Climate Emergency is a "personal view" next...

 

[littlescrote]

History is littered with businesses that "get it wrong" - I repeat, Betamax. This was a technically better product but that didn't help it survive. :ugeek:

Absolutely

It will be interesting watching "global corporations" defying the laws of physics :roll:

You say it's a "personal view", but it's just plain facts. Unless my sources have all got it wrong and you can prove my facts are actually incorrect. You'll be saying the Climate Emergency is a "personal view" next...

What laws of physics? What facts? Just because the end product of electrical power by charging and discharging of batteries directly is more efficient than hydrogen electrolysis and power generation (currently), doesn't mean that hydrogen does not have its place - it will. It's not only about efficiencies, but also capacity, distribution, refuel/recharge times, power density etc etc. If you think batteries are going to be the only solution, you're very much wrong.

Just as an example, how many real truck manufacturers are looking at making battery powered trucks? How many battery powered trains do you expect to see?

Please don't insult me with statements about the climate emergency. Nowhere have I said, or even hinted, that I don't think that's real.

 

[ThudnBlundr]

Using hydrogen as an intermediate fuel requires twice the generation capacity that simply using batteries requires. That is the fact that you seem to be ignoring. Who is going to pay for double the extra generation capacity just so that people can use hydrogen instead of batteries? The extra cost involved in supplying and running a hydrogen infrastructure makes it simply unfeasible for general use unless there is a breakthrough. As I said, there may be niche areas where the extra cost can be justified, but the mass market won't pay for the extra Gigawatts for everyone.

 

[littlescrote]

Using hydrogen as an intermediate fuel requires twice the generation capacity that simply using batteries requires. That is the fact that you seem to be ignoring. Who is going to pay for double the extra generation capacity just so that people can use hydrogen instead of batteries? The extra cost involved in supplying and running a hydrogen infrastructure makes it simply unfeasible for general use unless there is a breakthrough. As I said, there may be niche areas where the extra cost can be justified, but the mass market won't pay for the extra Gigawatts for everyone.

I haven't ignored it - I've directly said it! But in my opinion, that gap will reduce as electrolysis becomes more efficient. I don't see mass transportation of goods and people (trucks, trains, planes, shipping) as niche, and I don't see any of those widely using batteries instead of fuel cells.

In a lot of cases, the 'extra gigawatts' are free anyway, that's the point! When there's excess renewable power, we need to do something to store it and to some extent it doesn't matter how inefficient that process is as you are more or less getting something for nothing.

 

[ThudnBlundr]

Electrolysis has been around since the discovery of electricity. I'm not sure how it's magically going to get more efficient - I thought it was pretty close to its theoretical limit anyway. While fuel cells are new, I'm not sure how much more there is to come with their efficiency. And while you could use excess generation to produce hydrogen, you're still running at ½-efficiency. Far better to store the excess generation in grid-scale batteries and not throw away 60%!

 

[mellobob]

Doesn't this whole electricity discussion depend on just how the electricity you are using to charge you car comes from and the cost of the grid which delivers it? I've read that the current grid is not capable of transmitting the amount of juice that would be needed if every car, magically, became an EV. And, if that electricity is produced using coal or natural gas ... well, then it becomes moot as to the true benefits of plug-and-charge.

 

[ThudnBlundr]

I think the grid capacity depends on your location/country. I think that most places in the UK would be able to accommodate the extra capacity for EV charging with some time of use tariffs taking the edge of the peak. But the population density is quite high here, far higher than in BC or most of Canada. That's why Tesla's mega-battery in Australia was useful, as it evened out the delivery curve and reduced transitory costs by a ridiculous amount

 

[littlescrote]

Doesn't this whole electricity discussion depend on just how the electricity you are using to charge you car comes from and the cost of the grid which delivers it? I've read that the current grid is not capable of transmitting the amount of juice that would be needed if every car, magically, became an EV. And, if that electricity is produced using coal or natural gas ... well, then it becomes moot as to the true benefits of plug-and-charge.

But every car cannot magically become an EV, it takes time for the adoption during which any improvements will get made if any are necessary. In a lot of cases, no extra capacity is needed as the peaks are already catered for and EV charging can smooth those out.

Electrolysis has been around since the discovery of electricity. I'm not sure how it's magically going to get more efficient - I thought it was pretty close to its theoretical limit anyway. While fuel cells are new, I'm not sure how much more there is to come with their efficiency. And while you could use excess generation to produce hydrogen, you're still running at ½-efficiency. Far better to store the excess generation in grid-scale batteries and not throw away 60%!

Electrolysis and fuel cells are not going to magically get any more efficient - they are already getting more efficient through hard work of chemists and engineers!

We don't have grid scale batteries, and maybe never will have on the scale needed. They are not a panacea, anymore than I'm suggesting that fuel cells and electrolysis are a panacea. They are all part of THE answer, not simply AN answer in themselves. Please recognise that rather than being fixated on one technology that you think is the answer to all of the planet's problems.