IVYS Simple Fuel Station Offers Homemade Hydrogen For $250,000 – live video, UPDATE

4 months ago by Sebastian Blanco 114

IVYS Simple Fuel Hydrogen Station

It’s a lot cheaper than a full-scale H2 station, that’s for sure.

Simple Fuel hydrogen station logo

If you want to set up your own hydrogen refueling station, just talk to IVYS. The Massachusetts-based company is promoting its Simple Fuel station as an easy, relatively affordable (if you’re a fleet operator, any way) box that can pump compressed hydrogen fuel into your vehicle while only needing a power source, a water inlet, and a vent mast exhaust pipe. If you’ve got those things – and the $250,000-$300,000 that a Simple Fuel station costs, depending on options – you’re good to go.

IVYS President and CEO Darryl Pollica told InsideEVs at the MovinOn sustainable mobility conference in Montreal today that the Simple Fuel station is better for fleet use than a commercial retailer. That’s because the biggest capacity station can only make – through electrolysis – 10 kilograms of 700-bar H2 a day. That’s enough for a lot of hydrogen forklifts, but only around two hydrogen-powered passenger cars. The Honda Clarity, for example, needs 5.46 kg for a full tank. Even so, IVYS is promoting the Simple Fuel station as an option for traditional gas stations to expand their offerings of available fuels, in case they have one or two hydrogen cars in the neighborhood.

Bonus: InsideEVs live from the MovinOn conference (in Montreal) checking out the Simple Fuel station (from the 7:47 mark)

Pollica said that IVYS has a test unit in place in a program with Hyundai and a H2-powered Tucson in Pennsylvania, and is working to install a combined H2-Level 2 EV charging station in Boston in the near future. The hydrogen production options are either 5 or 10 kilograms a day, and eitehr 350 or 700 bar pressure. The dispense rate is about 10 minutes per kilogram, but it will vary depending on the kind of vehicle sucking down the fuel.

Simple Fuel at gas station

The station won the U.S. Department of Energy’s $1 million H2 Refuel H-Prize Competition back in February.

UPDATE: Wavelet had some questions about the efficiency numbers for the Simple Fuel system. I asked CEO Pollica for the details and this is what he told me, pulling out a calculator to do the math right on the spot.

To figure out how much time it takes to produce a kg of hydrogen, you can just do simple math. So, for the machine that makes 10 kilograms of hydrogen a day (all of these numbers will be based on the top-of-the-line, 700-bar, 10-kg unit, the SF-70-10), it takes 2.4 hours to make one kilogram of H2. That kilogram requires a total of 68.4 kWh of electricity to make. About 55 kWh are needed to electrolyze the water, and the rest is used for compression and operating features. Lastly, a kilogram of hydrogen needs just under a gallon of water (3.8 gallons, or 14.4 liters). And that’s RO standard (reverse osmosis) water in this case.

You can find more details in the Simple Fuel PDF here.

Source: IVYS

Tags: , , , ,

114 responses to "IVYS Simple Fuel Station Offers Homemade Hydrogen For $250,000 – live video, UPDATE"

  1. SparkEV says:

    I’m curious about operating cost. What are the consumables, how long they last, how much to service including labor and at what interval? Platinum electrodes are not cheap.

    At $250K start cost to fill up 2 cars, this is a no brainer: don’t bother.

    1. Four Electrics says:

      It’s not two cars, it’s more like twenty eight. Most cars need only be refuelled once every two weeks.

      Costs will surely drop, just as they did for batteries.

      1. SparkEV says:

        They don’t come down in price by magic. You need scale. At $250K for 2 cars at a time, and each taking almost an hour for full fill, there won’t be scale to reduce the cost.

        Think of it this way: $250K loan at 5% annual interest is $12.5K/yr. At 2 cars per day, that’s $12.5/365/2 = $17/car just to make the interest payment. When you factor in principle, consumables, customer service, it easily double or triple that. Who in their right mind would waste almost an hour to fuel regularly like gasoline cars and pay $40 to $60 when gasoline is cheaper and quicker?

      2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        “It’s not two cars, it’s more like twenty eight.”

        I see at least one of our resident fool cell fanboys is, as usual, firmly in denial of reality. But then, if they weren’t, they wouldn’t be fool cell fanboys, so there is definitely a cause and effect at work there.

        If this mini-station makes only 5 kg of H2 per day and it takes 50-100 minutes to fill up just one fool cell car, then this is not going to service a fleet of 28 cars! Even with the more expensive option for 10 kg of fuel per day, it’s still not going to… not unless you can magically ensure that no two cars ever need refilled on the same day!

        That may work on paper, but isn’t going to work in real life.

        But no doubt fool cell fanboys will claim they can handwave away that problem, just like they handwave away basic physics and the Laws of Thermodynamics to claim that someday compressed hydrogen will magically become a practical fuel!

        LOL! 😀

        1. FISHEV says:

          Except it would fill a car in about 10 minutes not an hour.

          Consider that China sells a HLPT-500H H2 generator 3l an hour at 250W for $1,500 about the cost of a 50A home EV charger.

          Easy to see a big solar array, a Tesla roof, producing either H2 or electricity for the family car.

          1. SparkEV says:

            Article states this unit is 10 minutes per kg, and most FCEV have more than 5 kg tank. That means full fill would take over 50 minutes.

          2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            FISHEV said:

            “Except it would fill a car in about 10 minutes not an hour.”

            No.

            It helps if you actually read the article you’re commenting on.

            1. FISHEV says:

              Helps even more if you read up on the issue beyond a description of a description while having a factless agenda.

          3. Nix says:

            FISHYV – The HLPT-500H produces half a liter an hour at 0.4 Mpa. The Clarity’s tank is 70 Mpa. You can’t use the HLPT-500H to fill a Clarity. It would stop before you got the tank even 1% filled.

            You might be able to drive a couple of miles on that. More likely, it would be below the minimum pressure needed to even operate.

    2. Peter says:

      So far the production cost with profit has been the same cost as petrol.

      So only made for those with to much money.

      Are you looking at saving money buy a solarroof and make your own electricity to you EV.

      It is as simple as that.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        “So far the production cost with profit has been the same cost as petrol.”

        Maybe about the same at-the-pump price as petrol, in countries where there are very high taxes on petrol. But certainly not in the USA, where we have relatively low gasoline/diesel taxes.

        Anyway, the actual cost is far higher than gasoline/diesel, even if taxes are used to, er, pump up the price of petrol and subsidies are used to lower the cost for compressed hydrogen.

        Non-subsidized H2 costs about $14-16 per kg. A fool cell car can go roughly twice as far on a kg of H2 as a gasmobile can go on a gallon of gas, so 1 kg of H2 is about equal to 2 gallons of gasoline, figured on the practical basis of how far it will take your car.

        At today’s average cost for “regular” gasoline in the USA, $2.329/gallon, and figuring H2 at $15/kg, that makes H2 ~3.2 x as expensive as gasoline in the American market.

    3. John says:

      For this device, \I don’t think any of that really matters…

      “The dispense rate is about 10 minutes per kilogram”

      Using their example of the Honda Clarity that needs 5.46 kg for a full tank, even a half tank will take nearly 30 minutes. L3 will get you 80% in that same amount of time.

      So, it’ll take longer, not provide as much range, and be more expensive.

      And the benefit is???

    4. peter lang says:

      you can use liquid ammonia as the hydrogen carrier and the new catalyst that uses ruthenium oxide and aluminum oxide to make hydrogen easy and at room temperature. saves you a million bucks and cuts out all this nonsense about “impractical” hydrogen

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Ammonia is corrosive and toxic. Methane is a far safer and more practical fuel to use as an energy carrier, if you’re going to use onboard fuel reforming to extract hydrogen from the fuel (see link below).

        The fact that fool cell fanboys keep talking about using laughably impractical compressed hydrogen, instead of a more practical renewable fuel like synthetic methane, is just one of many indications that their actual agenda has nothing to do with “green tech”, and is merely propaganda for Big Oil.

        https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140106094557.htm

      2. mevp says:

        Have you ever worked at a business that used ammonia as a refrigerant? Go work at one sometime and then get back to us on using ammonia.

        It’s highly toxic, and there are a LOT of regulations and safety protocols involved in it’s use, even in a closed system like commercial refrigeration systems.

        1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

          Pu-pu doesn’t work anywhere and doesn’t even drive, so he certainly doesn’t care about ammonia properties 😉 Discussing anything with him is the same as talking to robo-call message :/

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            …says the Big Oil shill who keeps saying I need to change my message, as if the Laws of Physics need to be reworded occasionally. “Oh, that’s so last year”… does not apply to fundamental laws of nature.

            Make you a deal, zzzzzzzzzzz: You figure out a way to change the properties of a hydrogen molecule — one that actually works in the real world — and I’ll change my message.

            1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

              You are not in the real world anymore, Pu-pu. Sorry but you just stuck in the silly EV advocacy cliches from last decade, and can’t update information in your head anymore. Life and technical progress went away and left you.

              Happy flooding and trolling!

      3. Ambulator says:

        Ruthenium is just as rare as, say, palladium. It’s currently cheaper, but add much demand and you can expect its price to reach the same levels.

  2. wavelet says:

    3 numbers missing from their website, aside from the initial $250K-300K cost…
    1) How much time to produce (not vend) a kg?
    2) How many kWh of electricity to produce a kg?
    3) How much water to product a kg?

    I suspect the answers, esp. to 1, would make this a non-starter…

    1. georgeS says:

      wavelet,

      why don’t you google it and report back with the results!!

    2. Sebastian Blanco says:

      Good questions. I’ll go back to the booth and ask.

    3. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      “1) How much time to produce (not vend) a kg?”

      The article says 5 kg per day for the base model, and 10 kg per day for the higher priced version. Assuming constant generation over time, which seems likely, and assuming “a day” means 24 hours, that’s 1 kg per 4.8 hours or 1 kg per 2.4 hours.

      /math

  3. alohart says:

    I suspect that the kg H2/kWh makes the H2 very expensive and uncompetitive with charging a battery pack directly.

    1. georgeS says:

      …and a worse carbon footprint than an EV also.

    2. Four Electrics says:

      There are periods in California when electricity costs go negative.

      Similarly, solar will soon be below four cents a kWh.

      For hydrogen to take off, it needs to be comparable in price to an ICE. That bar has been met already. HEVs already fill up faster than BEVs and don’t require thousand pound batteries. And, of course, they are ZEV.

      1. pjwood1 says:

        There are periods in Texas when electricity costs reach $5 per KWh. Your point?

        Similarly, 4 cent utility-solar gets about 7-8 cents layered on top for transmission.

        For hydrogen to take off, it can’t be 3 times as expensive as EVs to fuel. Stations, whose subsidy would make ethanol blush, have to be everywhere because you can’t “fill at home”. Take an EV ~400 miles, with a 30 minute highway charge, or just fly.

      2. SparkEV says:

        You’re assuming people are idiots who won’t take advantage of “negative electric prices” other than with H.

        If a company has a subscriber base of BEV and they are widely connected via L2 (or even L1), they can increase or decrease the charge power depending on spot pricing. Then the utility doesn’t have to give out “negative pricing”, company providing charging makes money, and EV drivers save money.

        In fact, distributed load control is far better than some centralized H producer since they allow for finer grained control over local conditions as well as having redundancy.

        Is there such a company? Something like it exist already if you saw/clicked on the ads popping up on IEV. Supposedly, you save something like $400.

        Sure, it doesn’t work well with 100 mile range BEV, but with 240 miles range BEV, one has lots of margin such that not having it charged to 100% every day doesn’t really matter. And we already know that 200+ miles range EVs are far cheaper than any FCEV.

        As for weight, it doesn’t matter if you carry around 1 million pounds if it’s more efficient and use less energy than 1 pound car. Fact is, Mirai and all other FCEV are heavier and more expensive than Bolt.

      3. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Four Electrics continued to promote the “hydrogen economy” hoax:

        “For hydrogen to take off, it needs to be comparable in price to an ICE. That bar has been met already.”

        Only if the H2 is sold at a highly subsidized price.

        But if you stop comparing apples to Rubik’s Cubes, then H2 dispensed into a fool cell car is considerably more expensive than gasoline dispensed into a gasmobile, and both physics and basic economics — EROI (Energy Return On Investment) — mandate it always will be so… despite the wishful thinking of you fool cell fanboys.

      4. MikeG says:

        You claim refueling time is faster with H2 than recharge time for a BEV. From the story, it will take roughly 10 mins to transfer a kg of H2 from this station to your vehicle.

        So the whole refueling time with H2 thing doesn’t quite live up to the claims, does it?

        1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

          It is initial product for small fleet use. It has nothing to do with normal retail stations, that can do 3 minute refueling and likely to cost less per kg dispensed.

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            “…3 minute refueling…”

            I am frequently astonished, zzzzzzzzzz, at your habit of telling such easily checked and easily refuted lies in support of the “hydrogen economy” hoax. Is it really difficult to understand that sticking to the truth where possible would make your shilling less obvious and more convincing?

            Still, this is much closer to the truth than most of your claims in support of the “hydrogen economy” hoax. Quoting from “EV Fueling Time” at Clean Car Options.com:

            The average time to fill the hydrogen tanks was 4.4 minutes, and 74% of the fillings took less than five minutes.

            http://www.cleancaroptions.com/html/ev_fueling_time.html

            1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

              Pu-pu was astonished reading some oversimplified blog repost of “March 13, 2009” NREL report. Just as I have noticed, you stuck in the last decade and can’t update your prejudices anymore.

              1. Nix says:

                Then it should be easy for you to provide a more recent source of data.

                The reality is that the laws of physics haven’t changed in the last decade. The time it takes to fill a 10,000 PSI tank is still a function of the pressure delta between the tank and the filling station, and the dimensions of the filler.

                1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

                  What do you mean? It is not 2009 now, look out of the window, 2017 is on calendar. Pilot FC cars and retail level (Class A) H2 stations are all over California and people know perfectly well how long does it take to fill. There are full up to date statistics available from NREL, no need to fish last decade propaganda blog posts like Pu-pu does:

                  http://www.nrel.gov/hydrogen/infrastructure-cdps-retail.html

                  Average fill is some 3.5 minutes:

                  If you add time you need to get out of the car, swipe card, look around, get back, it may take 5 minutes in practice:
                  https://www.edmunds.com/toyota/mirai/2016/long-term-road-test/2016-toyota-mirai-hydrogen-vs-electricity-road-trip-to-lake-tahoe.html

                  It may also add a minute or 2 in very hot weather, see SAE J2601 fueling tables showing dependence on temperature and pressure on page 12 for Type A (retail) stations:
                  http://www.energy.ca.gov/contracts/notices/2012-07-10_workshop/presentations/SAE_Jesse_Schneider_Fueling_Protocol.pdf

                  Sure these 1-2 minutes are terribly important and worth nitpicking about all day long 😉 Please proceed now how blazingly fast and revolutionary are 75 minute “Super” chargers 😉

      5. Mark.ca says:

        “For hydrogen to take off, it needs to be comparable in price to an ICE. That bar has been met already.”
        WHAT??? So a premium prius in your area costs $50K?

        1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

          You may get Prius Two lease for $250, Prime maybe for $350 – it varies. Mirai or Clarity lease is $350-369 including fuel and options in California, plus state gives rebate and extra lane access. So yes, it is comparable if you include subsidies. Next generation automotive FC that is getting ready for release in around 2020 will be even more competitive.

      6. Priusmaniac says:

        Any place with negative electricity price is acting like an invest here board for a pump storage plant. Even today, nothing can compete with a two basin water storage system at 75% yield and a KWh storage cost far bellow anything.
        In more they now come with new flavors like sea water pump storage, rail gravity storage or more compact vertical systems.

        http://revolution-green.com/chilean-pumped-storage-scheme-to-harness-seawater-and-solar-power/
        http://www.aresnorthamerica.com/grid-scale-energy-storage
        http://www.gravitypower.net/technology-gravity-power-energy-storage/

    3. wavelet says:

      No need to suspect. Basic physics of planet earth:
      1) There is no free hydrogen on the planet (and the tiny quantities that appear due to artificial containers leaking tend to explode or burn in colorless flame).
      Not applicable to the outer planets in the solar system like Jupiter (90% H2), or interstellar hydrogen, of course, but I’ve yet to see proposal’s for a pipeline to get them here (-:

      2) Therefore, the only way to get H2 planetside is break down molecules which have H in them. Every single way of doing so requires more (much more) energy for the breakdown than the resulting H2 stores.

      3) H2 FCEV supporters saying “but if we had a cheap source of energy” are ignoring the fact that no matter how cheap, it would be several times cheaper to use that energy to charge batteries.

      4) All that completely ignores the lack of H2 transportation infrastructure. Neither existing pipelines nor tanker trucks/ships are suitable for H2 transportation, and doing so on a wide scale will require a lot of R&D (taking years if not decades and billions) not to mention the cost of the infrastructure, trillions.

      5) Fuel cells do not scale up and down as well as pure BEV devices, which aren’t limited to transportation.

      1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

        My bicycle doesn’t use any fuel or electricity, and I use it whenever I can.

        Yet I’m not complete idiot and do not advocate to use bicycles to replace everything – cars, trucks, trains, kitchen sinks, etc. Some battery cult members however are firmly convinced that batteries can do everything, and somebody will drop free battery cargo from the skies just as they waive their hands hard enough :/

        1. SparkEV says:

          I happen to be looking into SparkEV vs bicycle comparison.

          Bicycle does use energy in the form of human metabolism. It’s roughly 16.5 mi/kWh for me at about 12 MPH average speed. It’s probably similar for most people.

          SparkEV is 7.3 mi/kWh at 24 MPH. Having 3 ppl in the car might drop it to 7.2 mi/kWh, but it would spread over 3 ppl. Taking basal metabolism of 0.1 kW per person into account, SparkEV would result in 20 mi/kWh per person, much better than bicycle.

          If you consider the peak efficiency to occur about 18 MPH and close to 8 mi/kWh, 2.3 ppl (2 adults + dog) in SparkEV would be more efficient than bicycle.

          1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

            SparkEV:

            So you it would be more efficient to buy gym membership and take space on street to drive SparkEV to it? 😉 I don’t know if it makes so much sense, as human metabolism is required part of life anyway.

            1. SparkEV says:

              Humans are only about 20% efficient. SparkEV is about 90% efficient. Purely from battery (food) to motion point of view, there is some point where driving SparkEV becomes less polluting than riding the bicycle. If you already have SparkEV and you have a sexy girl + a dog to ride with you in traffic (avg of about 20 MPH), driving SparkEV is more efficient than bicycling.

              By the way, she can’t be too sexy since your panting might increase your metabolism. 😀

            2. SparkEV says:

              By the way, I include basal metabolism (resting metabolism) of people sitting in the car in my calculation for SparkEV.

              1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

                If you will use resting metabolism exclusively half of your life, you may be forced to start taking expensive and inefficient rides in emergency truck, not SparkEV, and holy energy efficiency will be the last thing to worry about 😉

  4. ClarksonCote says:

    Sure makes a Level 2 EVSE or even a DCFC look affordable, haha.

    I still don’t understand the interest in hydrogen fueling. It’s instant like gasoline, but with a few more years of advancements in Li-Ion and solid state batteries, you’ll have the same thing without all the complexity and explosive-tendencies of hydrogen.

    1. Four Electrics says:

      Gasoline fuels at the equivalent of 1.5 megawatts. The grid can’t take too many equivalent fast chargers running at the same time: each takes the power of 1,500 homes. Not scalable.

      1. Josh Bryant says:

        Long term, I think capacitors will be used at HVDC charging stations to buffer.

        Caps won’t work in cars cause of space, but should be a big deal for charging sites. And has nearly unlimited cycle life.

        1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

          Long term, we will just use hyperspace and teleport ourselves to Mars and back.
          Meanwhile, how about trying some temporary ad hock solution that works here on Earth for the next few decades until all these miracle solid state batteries, cheap supercapacitors and antigravity will transcend from lab announcements into mass production?

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            Someone might try putting a gasoline-powered range extender into an EV, so it can continue to be driven without worrying about en-route charging if you run your EV past its electric range limit, if the range provided by the convenience of charging at home or at work isn’t sufficient for a day’s driving.

            Chevrolet might even make such a car, and they could even call it a “Volt”.

            But of course, there’s no room for that on whatever planet you live on, in your world of science denial and Big Oil shilling.

            Sad.

            1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

              As usual, Pu-pu starts advocating for diesel, gas and internal combustion when his favorite brand looses argument. Thanks for showing your true face, Mr. Big Oil Shill 😉

      2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        “Gasoline fuels at the equivalent of 1.5 megawatts.”

        …and requires you to drive your car to a special store to fill the tank. How inconvenient!

        Future generations will be amazed that we put up with filthy, polluting, noisy cars that don’t have instant response to the accelerator, constantly belch poisonous gas from an exhaust pipe; cars that had to be driven to a special store about once a week just to recharge it, because you can’t charge them at home.

      3. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

        Gasoline vehicles fuel every mile at a filling station. Electric vehicles not only fuel a very small proportion of miles at filling stations, but they also use the delivered electricity efficiently.

        By the time it could be a problem, it wouldn’t be a problem.

      4. ClarksonCote says:

        As others pointed out, batteries can provide a buffer and supply the “average” power draw over some time period at a charger, with minimal impact to the grid.

        You don’t need 1.5MW of pull from the grid, you need some power averaged over time, which will be far less. In other words, just like gas pumps that are not always pumping.

        1. Bill Howland says:

          To the contrary, a busy gas station may have one pump simultaneously feeding 8 cars, all refueling at the same time. The days of a 1/2 hp explosion-proof pump at the end of a gasoline hose are long gone. If it is one of those stations where the pump can ‘keep up’ with the demand of 8 cars, then you’re not talking 1.5 megawatts but 12 megawatts.

          Fortunately, EV’s and PHEV’s never have to be charged in this way.

      5. Priusmaniac says:

        Yes we can because at that rate there the car is filled very fast and rapidly makes place for the next one. No problem at all.

      6. Bill Howland says:

        You are right in the sense that there will never be fast chargers that take the resources of 1500 homes – or at least, none of the middle class will use them.

        It all boils down to cost, and what will John Q. Public pay for.

        Hydrogen apparently has a future in Locales where electricity is either scarce, or very expensive.

        Much of the USA has reasonably priced electricity, and the vast majority of ev’s can be charged at home at a 1 to 1 1/2 kw rate, requiring no infrastructure changes whatsoever.

        While the cost of this is ‘only $250,000’ and the price may come down, it won’t come down to zero – which is what it is competing with 120 volt charged EV’s, and PHEV’s.

        1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

          Bill Howland:
          “While the cost of this is ‘only $250,000’ and the price may come down, it won’t come down to zero – which is what it is competing with 120 volt charged EV’s, and PHEV’s.”

          120V BEVs have no chance to replace most gas cars and trucks that are expected to have unlimited range and flexibility. As far as PHEVs are concerned, they may be both ICE and FC. Obviously ICE wins by cost and flexibility now, but air pollution IS an issue bad enough in many locales, and eventually ICE will be pushed out by governments. Fuel cost is just fraction of TCO anyway, upfront cost and depreciation is more important.

          1. Bill Howland says:

            Any place having a problem with SMOG would GLADLY take a 75% reduction in gasoline usage that happens when people start driving volts or prius primes.

            Tell ya what – GIVE me one of these $250,000 jobs and I’ll install it in my driveway.

            1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

              Places that have air quality issues are typically congested urban areas with most of the people living in multi-store buildings and having limited parking, and even more limited overnight charging availability in practice.

              Technically government may control how PHEV are driving, on electricity or gas, but in practice enforcement would be a major hassle. Add too much incentives to compensate hefty PHEV price premium over regular ICE, and you will have people driving them just like ICE without plugging in. Too little incentives, few would buy them. So while PHEV is fine personal solution for the time being, I don’t see it replacing most of ICE cars & trucks in the long term.

    2. pjwood1 says:

      It’s like Rick Perry, and DOE’s, interest in solid fuel welfare for the sake of “diversity” and “grid reliability”. Ultimately, you can charge for solid/liquid fuels, and their transport. Industry self-service, self-preservation. Swamp wins, and all that.

  5. James P Heartney says:

    “The dispense rate is about 10 minutes per kilogram”

    i.e about an hour to refill an FCEV tank. Remember, the big draw for H2 is how refills are so fast.

    Oops.

    1. Spoonman. says:

      Yeah, what’s the point in this case?

      1. wavelet says:

        It’s right there on their website: Getting government grant money.

        1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          And thus, the real motive for auto makers and certain other companies to promote the “hydrogen economy” hoax. It’s not all motivated by shilling for Big Oil.

  6. JR says:

    Fuel Cell and a tank for storing Hydrogen long term(over winter) and supplying energy for house is not a bad idea but this is over priced

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Storing highly compressed hydrogen on a seasonal basis isn’t practical. The H2 molecule is so small it leaks past all seals, and even slowly leaks thru the solid wall of a tank. That’s just one of many reasons why H2 is an absurdly impractical choice for an everyday fuel.

      I’d like to see actual figures on how fast such tanks leak, but my guess is that you’d lose most of the pressure within a few/several weeks.

      1. HydrogenWins says:

        Mike Strizki has stored hydrogen (made from electricity that his solar panels produce) in old propane tanks since 2005. You can see him explain his setup here: http://hydrogenhouseproject.org/

        Mr. Strizki is living proof that your “guess” is totally and completely wrong.

        As for your repeated use of “fool cell” (disrespecting thousands of good people that have worked for decades on this tech), here’s the latest from Panasonic, who is about to start selling their home fuel cell units in Europe https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-16/panasonic-aims-to-expand-home-fuel-cell-system-market-in-europe

        Do you think Elon Musk refers to “fool cells” when he’s bargaining with Panasonic on his latest lithium battery price? Hey but it was good fun, having a big laugh with his faithful trained seal fanboys.

  7. Vexar says:

    What a waste of clean water and electricity. Oh, and money. And space. Geez. You could put a full supercharger with one stall for that square footage.

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      But just think, it would support Big Oil’s profits, and pouring money into “the hydrogen economy” infrastructure would slow the EV revolution! Surely those are good enough reasons right there, aren’t they?

      /sarcasm

    2. zzzzzzzzzz says:

      Yes, and a diesel generator to power the supercharger on demand. Should work just fine.

  8. Brett says:

    What could possibly fit inside that box which costs so much?

    1. Chris O says:

      What fits in there is hydrogen, that highly tricky element that is mishandled at one’s own peril. Serious safety is serious bucks, one of the reasons HFCVs will never go mainstream.

    2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      High-pressure pumps are expensive, and always will be (just ask the aerospace industry!), and so are tanks with special seals designed to reduce the inevitable leakage of H2.

      Just two of many reasons why H2 will always remain a ridiculously impractical fuel, despite the wishful thinking and/or Big Oil propaganda of “fool cell” fanboys.

    3. Mark.ca says:

      “What could possibly fit inside that box which costs so much?”
      Yes, all this hi tech stuff mentioned above plus a backpack with $200K can be found inside….

  9. spin says:

    If they are competing with a free home electric filling station it’s really a big problem for them. The Hydrogen economy should really be renamed the Natural Gas economy as that’s where 99% of it will be coming from.

    1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

      If you watch the video (I know, novel approach watch & read more than headline 😉 ), the guy explicitly says it probably doesn’t make sense as home station.

  10. Roy LeMeur says:

    Only $250K? Sign me up!

  11. Mat says:

    shell out 250k so you can refuel your car full tank in 50 minutes? loose half of the electrical power while making the hydrogen and half of that again when turning it back into electricity in your car? seriously?

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      You forgot: Lose half (actually more) of the energy when compressing the hydrogen.

      The energy efficiency of a small-scale dispensing unit like this will be even worse than a full-sized H2 fueling station. The economy of scale works against such small units.

  12. pjwood1 says:

    Cost: Water in H2 out

    It would be good for someone to freshen this link, because I think Mirai is marginally more efficient. The point, however, would be close to the same.
    https://phys.org/news/2006-12-hydrogen-economy-doesnt.html

    You start with 100KWh and water, and end up with ~20KWh of work being applied to the road. Only states pursuing environmental policy (aggressively) would do this, so use their higher KWh rates to see what it costs per mile. In MA, where this company is from, the $.18/KWh average would mean $18 for those 100KWh. Since H2 cars are electric at the end of the mechanical chain, an assumption of 3mp kwh from a traditional electric cars can be reduced by the relative inefficiency of H2 creation (~20KWh/69KWh chart=.29). So, where an EV might get 3mp KWh, a H2/BEV would get closer to 1 mile per 1 KWh energy costs. That’s about the same as gas, assuming one has $250,000 to burn. Interesting. It makes pricing the avoided CO2 easier. $250k, over ~50 car-life tons implies a carbon price of $5,000 per ton. -Try getting that on the policy table.

    Fun muse…I’ll pass. Please, check math.

    1. pjwood1 says:

      …the other point to this, is that natural gas is the go-to method of making H2, where the CO2 emissions negate the purpose and liquid fuel distributors up the price to about the same result, or worse.

      There’s an article waiting to be written on how distribution affects costs. Ngas through an outlet, or Ngas through a CNG provider’s pump. Which is more efficient/environmental, is only half the analysis.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        …which is why Chevron and Shell Hydrogen are full members of the California Fuel Cell Partnership, which in the U.S. is the source of most propaganda in support of “the hydrogen economy” hoax.

  13. DJ says:

    It’s probably cheaper than a Solar Roof.

    Seriously though if you’re a fleet operator and were thinking of installing a gas filling station and all that goes with this is probably cheaper in the long run 😀

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      No, in the long run it would be much more expensive than running a fleet of cars on gasoline, because of the high cost in electricity to run the unit.

      The energy cost in such a small unit is going to be even worse than the energy cost for a larger H2 fueling station, because the economy of scale works against a small unit like this.

  14. randomhuman says:

    I would rather buy a home charging station for 500 bucks. I mean 250K c’mon…That’s a joke.

  15. William L. says:

    $250k to charge 2 cars a day? can major car companies understand Hydrogen is not going to win against electric with batteries.

    1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

      How about some basic math?
      10 kg is 2*5kg, or some 2*300 miles, or 220,000 miles/year. Maybe 10-20 cars unless you are talking about taxi company.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Now try adding in the cost for electricity to generate all that H2, and see how your math looks. Especially since the efficiency of such a small scale unit will be even worse than the “normal” horrible inefficiency for a fool cell car’s H2 supply chain.

  16. Nix says:

    $250,000 dollars??

    That would buy SEVEN of the 60 kW fastchargers that Tesla has sold in the past to private individuals. Other brands at slower rates are even cheaper, but these would charge at the same roughly 1 hour refill rate for the Clarity that this hydrogen station would provide

    http://insideevs.com/tesla-sells-60-kw-superchargers-swedish-business-owner/

    Using electrolysis, and compressing the hydrogen, the hydrogen station would use around 4 times the same electricity as a battery charger.

    Seems like they have a long ways to go, and they are up against a moving target that is improving at a rapid pace.

    1. floydboy says:

      Yep. I don’t see this as even remotely competitive with direct to storage/use systems. As direct charging becomes cheaper and faster, any competitive gap only widens.

      Once speed parity is reached, then hydrogen becomes an niche for a few wealthy aficionados. The only hope is to convince people that hydrogen will be better than future battery technology will be. Or that they somehow need both for the transportation sector and that they need to stick to the old style fueling paradigm.

      It most assuredly will NOT compete with electricity on price.

    2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      “Using electrolysis, and compressing the hydrogen, the hydrogen station would use around 4 times the same electricity as a battery charger.”

      I would guess that a small unit like this would have an energy loss even worse than 4:1, due to disadvantageous economy of scale. I won’t venture to guess just how much worse. I’d love to see figures on the actual energy consumed by the unit, and it’s hardly surprising the manufacturer isn’t advertising those figures.

    3. zzzzzzzzzz says:

      1.
      $250k at 4% and 10 year amortization schedule would be $2,531.13/month
      10 kg daily for 68 mpge Clarity would provide 680 miles, or 248,200 miles/year, or 16 cars doing 15k miles year.
      16 cars *$369/month lease = $5904/month.
      Total: 2531+5904=$8,435/month

      2. For $8,435/month you can lease at most 8 bare bones Model S 75 without any options, that won’t go anywhere close to 300 miles, won’t have as much passenger space as Clarity, and won’t be able to refuel in 3 minutes on road for free using included fuel card.

      So even at this high initial price SimpleFuel station and Honda provides TWICE as much value for small fleet operator than Tesla. Not that it makes much sense to make your own fuel for cars when H2 fuel is paid for by automakers anyway, but please get a clue about the numbers and why companies like Walmart, Amazon, Hyster-Yale are fueling their material handling vehicles with hydrogen.

      1. Nix says:

        1) Good luck getting 4% interest rate on 100% financing of a business loan. It doesn’t work that way. A charger at a business isn’t a home mortgage that can be re-sold, bundled, etc. It would be at a much higher rate, with much higher required down. You also left out the $3K down times 16 cars.

        2) Why calculate with the price of a Model S, when the Model 3 will be available long before this hydrogen station (which is just in testing phase) is available for purchase? All the sudden your math goes out the window.

        Not that you did the math right in the first place…

        It is too bad that IEV’s considers hydrogen cars to be EV’s. H2 fuel cell stories just attract a whole bunch of folks like the notorious reddit troll violentacrez to EV stories on this site.

        1. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

          Oh, I’m sure that they know that it’s clickbait here.

          But there’s no problem having the occasional story about HFCV. I’d rather read a story like this than an article about a rendering.

        2. zzzzzzzzzz says:

          Nix:
          “Good luck getting 4% interest rate on 100% financing of a business loan. It doesn’t work that way.”

          If it would be bundled by Honda for example, it would be just an autoloan with typical 2%. Even at 7% barely secured loan rate, it would be only $2,902.71/month, or $400/month extra to the number I provided. Mouse nuts.

          “You also left out the $3K down times 16 cars.”
          Yes, and I have left downpayment for Tesla cars too as it doesn’t change anything for DOUBLE Tesla TCO. It isn’t detailed business plan to account for every penny, just show how far behind Tesla technology and execution is from mass market suitability. Fuel cost is just fraction of TCO.

          “2) Why calculate with the price of a Model S, when the Model 3 will be available long before this hydrogen station (which is just in testing phase) is available for purchase? All the sudden your math goes out the window.”

          Sure, if you compare subcompact or compact class Model 3 that can’t even travel 300 miles and has no price, with 102.0 cu ft. passenger volume Clarity. Do you realize what a laughable stretch would be to make such comparison? If you want to compare more equivalent cars, take Model S 100D and add some options, and you’ll end up with TRIPPLE TCO for Tesla. If you want to compare future vaporware with imaginary specs and price, it will be available from Hyundai, Toyota and Honda too any time soon, cheaper and better comparing to their own offers today.

          1. Nix says:

            The “Mouse Nuts” you talk about all add up to over $100K dollars!! $112,000 to be exact for 10 years of 36 month leases (the only kind Honda offers for the Clarity). And you have completely ignored the cost of fuel by at the same time saying you can fill with this refill station, while pretending you get the fuel for free at some other station. You can’t do both. The fuel from this station doesn’t come free from Honda or anybody else.

            If you are getting your fuel for free from Honda, you’ve just negated ANY value of this refilling station. It is a quarter million dollar pet rock.

            _________________________

            You whine that the Model 3 isn’t yet for sale this month. Yet this station isn’t for sale yet either, with no ETA on production. While the Model 3 is officially on track for production to begin next month. So much for that argument.

            Finally, the Clarity has an interior volume of 113.8, compared to the Model S with 126 with the frunk included. The Model S is in a whole class above the Clarity. The Clarity is a Midsize Sedan, the Model S is a Large Sedan according the the EPA, and they are THE authoritative source. The EPA are the ones who created the categories specifically for comparing EPA test numbers between similar categories of vehicles. You don’t get to fabricate new categories that ignore cargo capacity. It is the Clarity that is left far behind in any Model S comparison, with much worse 0-60, much worse MPGe, and much worse fill/charge infrastructure, etc. The Clarity is the clear loser.

            The cargo space of only 11.8 capacity of the Clarity is SMALLER than the Model 3, with a total of 14. So you can bring your 3 goony-goo-goo big-boned kids and your goony-goo-goo big-boned wife in your Clarity, but don’t expect to pack their luggage. Which makes sense, because while you can drive 300+ miles in a Clarity, those 300 miles are limited to a big circle up and down the coast from LA to SF. Forget going across the country, or even out of state very far…

            Sadly, you will remain blind because you wish to remain blind.

            1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

              Nix:
              >>>The “Mouse Nuts” you talk about all add up to over $100K dollars!! $112,000 to be exact for 10 years of 36 month leases (the only kind Honda offers for the Clarity).<<>> And you have completely ignored the cost of fuel by at the same time saying you can fill with this refill station, while pretending you get the fuel for free at some other station. You can’t do both. The fuel from this station doesn’t come free from Honda or anybody else.<>>Finally, the Clarity has an interior volume of 113.8, compared to the Model S with 126 with the frunk included. The Model S is in a whole class above the Clarity.<<> The Clarity is a Midsize Sedan, the Model S is a Large Sedan according the the EPA, and they are THE authoritative source. <>> worse 0-60<<>>, much worse MPGe,<<>>> and much worse fill/charge infrastructure, etc. The Clarity is the clear loser.<<<>> Sadly, you will remain blind because you wish to remain blind. <<<

              No, I don't want to become a member of Musk cult, no need to preach to me. I prefer to have my own free mind.

            2. zzzzzzzzzz says:

              Nix:
              “The “Mouse Nuts” you talk about all add up to over $100K dollars!! $112,000 to be exact for 10 years of 36 month leases (the only kind Honda offers for the Clarity).”

              I have given all the numbers, now you are taking the $112,000 out of nowhere and expect to take you seriously? You may write $112 billions as well.

              “And you have completely ignored the cost of fuel by at the same time saying you can fill with this refill station, while pretending you get the fuel for free at some other station. You can’t do both. The fuel from this station doesn’t come free from Honda or anybody else.”

              You can do both depending on convenience and time, why not. This refill station is electrolyzer based. You may calculate difference in electricity consumption all day long if you have free time, but it is obvious that it will will not overcome 2-3 times higher astronomical depreciation cost for Tesla Model S, so I will not bother.

              If you are getting your fuel for free from Honda, you’ve just negated ANY value of this refilling station. It is a quarter million dollar pet rock.

              “You whine that the Model 3 isn’t yet for sale this month. Yet this station isn’t for sale yet either, with no ETA on production. While the Model 3 is officially on track for production to begin next month. So much for that argument.”

              Yeh, officially on track, Musk said so, so it is holy true! The same as Model X was on sale in 2014, or sub-$30k electric car (aka Model 3 now) was on sale in 2014 according dear prophet’s 2009 claim. Keep believing, I can’t argue with dreams.

              “Finally, the Clarity has an interior volume of 113.8, compared to the Model S with 126 with the frunk included. The Model S is in a whole class above the Clarity.”

              Sure, if you like to put passengers in frunk or in trunk, Model S is superior. Some drivers get SWAT style traffic stops after putting kids in Model S trunk, but if your business demands it, who cares. Clarity offers better passenger compartment volume though. Model S/X has 94+26 c.f. volume according to EPA, not 126 last time I had checked.
              http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=37423&id=37422&id=38187&id=38062&#tab2
              Anyway, after checking the lease price difference, it just another planet, no point to nit-pick.

              “The Clarity is a Midsize Sedan, the Model S is a Large Sedan according the the EPA, and they are THE authoritative source.”

              I know it perfectly well, EPA classification just adds cargo and passenger volume together and Model S or X reaches bare minimum 120 c.f. required for “large” car by counting almost useless frunk space.

              “worse 0-60”

              Sure, if 0-60 is priority for your business fleet, Model S is best choice. I prefer do not make passengers sick from reckless acceleration and do not pay exorbitant insurance rates from being in the same insurance pool as reckless drivers.

              “, much worse MPGe,”

              Mpge cost difference is mouse nuts, see above.

              “and much worse fill/charge infrastructure, etc. The Clarity is the clear loser.”

              Clarity FC is technology demonstration and real life testing, not a tool to create financial pyramid and sell luxury price tag cars at loss. They don’t compete in the same space. The technology itself makes Clarity clear winner. Sales and infrastructure quantity (not quality) is different area.

              “Sadly, you will remain blind because you wish to remain blind.”

              No, I don’t want to become a member of Musk cult and spend money on triple price holy cars and financial pyramids, no need to preach to me. I prefer to have my own free mind.

      2. SparkEV says:

        $2531/mo and 10kg per day (300 kg per month) means $8.44/kg just for the loan. Add the consumable, service, etc. and it’d be over $10/kg, probably over $15/kg.

        Meanwhile, gasoline is $3/kg equivalent. That means the best case scenario for H using this is over 2 times more expensive than gasoline, and likely 5 times more expensive.

        1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

          Gasoline from pharmacies was also more expensive than feeding horses 100+ years ago.

          1. SparkEV says:

            Cars offered advantages over horses. FCEV offer zero advantage over ICE cars for the end user. In fact, FCEV are like horses of the past: less convenient.

            1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

              They offer very obvious advantage – no toxic exhaust. Silent and vibration free drivetrain is minor extra.
              Sure, an end user may not care about exhaust just like he doesn’t care about dumping his garbage straight on street, but governments typically provide incentives that reach the same end user when the stink becomes unbearable to most of the population, and businesses have hard time attracting higher end executives and specialists willing to live in the toxic stink, like it happens now in China.

  17. Jimi Seko says:

    This is an article from The Onion. Ha, ha, very funny, LOL!

  18. Get Real says:

    And meanwhile, my solar PV consistently pumps out 30kwh/day average for the cost of about $10,000 self-installed 3 years ago.

    Just completed a 7th solar pv self-install for under $7000 with an ex-Army buddy so the rapid reduction in solar costs coupled with battery storage is going to way out-compete these highly inefficient H2 units for individuals.

    My system easily covers my house and my 2012Volt and wife’s 2017 leased Bolt.

    Electrolysis H2 might make sense at industrial level for seasonal energy storage in edge cases (will have to compete with more efficient storage methods like pumped hydro).

    But this makes absolutely ZERO SENSE for individual ownership and especially as a transportation fuel.

    Can’t wait to see Tesla’s Version 3 DCFC that is rumored to be unveiled alongside the Tesla Semi in3 months as I suspect it will represent the future path forward for rapid recharging of long-range BEVs.

  19. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    “The dispense rate is about 10 minutes per kilogram…”

    Well, so much for the claim by fool cell fanboys that filling up a fool cell car is faster than recharging a BEV!

    And at $250,000+…

    Recently I mentioned this system as a possibility for fool cell fanboys who want to fill up at home, but I noted the website offering them for sale didn’t list a price, so guessed that the mini H2 fueling station might even cost more than the car.

    WOW did I ever underestimate the price!

    1. floydboy says:

      So did I! I had it pegged at less than $75,000.

  20. Some Guy says:

    Cool. For the cost of one of those H2 stations one gets a maxed out Tesla (or two entry model S), of course including free supercharging during long disctance travel and has still enough money left to afford over 1 million miles equivalent of energy cost for home charging.
    From an econmical point of view, that thing is unfortunately not even a business case if the Fool Cell vehicle is given away for free (because it still needs energy to make and compress the hydrogen).

  21. philip d says:

    Hmm. A house with a level 2 charger and 2 EVs or 1 H2 station with no money left over for a house or even any HFCVs to fill up?

  22. SJC says:

    Honda Clarity had one 10 years ago.

  23. Brave Lil' Toaster says:

    Really? That’s it?

    Wow. I could install a DCQC in my garage for that price.

  24. Pokey Stuff says:

    I already have one of these, it is called a solar panel and a battery. The battery is in my car!

  25. David Murray says:

    How many CCS fast chargers could you install for that price?

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      I’m sure the price varies, but Tesla supercharger units are said to cost $50,000 per, so the lowest-priced unit would cost as much as 5 Superchargers servicing 10 stalls, and the more expensive one 6 Superchargers = 12 stalls.

      And of course, the cost for electricity to charge up cars using DCFC is going to be only a small fraction of the cost to run this H2 generation/compression system.

      It’s really hard to see who would be foolish enough to invest money in this tech. Well, other than Four Electrics and zzzzzzzzzz, that is. 😉

Leave a Reply