[hamdani yusuf]

The electric car is a theoretical partial solution to the problem of urban air quality - the other 50% being due to buses and trucks. But it is a long way from being a practical form of personal transport for all because we don't have a magic electricity tree, or even an inkling of how to make one.

Buses and trucks will be electrified too. Solar roof will be almost as cheap as ordinary roof. Many Tesla users testified that their solar pack and power wall generate plenty of energy to be used for charging their cars and home appliance. They can even sell the excess of energy to the grid.

[alancalverd]

I would worry about integrating batteries into the chassis because if I hit a pothole or a gatepost (yes, it happens) I'd distort the plates, either creating an immediate short circuit and fire, or a hotspot that catches fire the next time I accelerate.

Why do you think that those can't happen with currently existing battery, with dead mass chassis?
There is a demonstration video showing the safety of new model battery being safely cut into pieces using scissors while fully charged.

Quite possibly. Now consider a battery delivering 250A at 400V, and short-circuit one cell. Or partially open-circuit a cell so the internal impedance rises. Not a pretty sight. Which is why batteries are generally not made subject to bending or impact stresses.

[alancalverd]

Buses and trucks will be electrified too. Solar roof will be almost as cheap as ordinary roof.

Indeed, I have been offered a solar roof at pretty much the cost of a tiled roof. Problem is that I already have a roof, as does everyone else, so you need to spend another £30,000 or so per car to install an independent charging system. Except that most people will want to charge their cars at night, when the roof isn't working.

Solar electricity  is not reliable in the UK, never delivers more than 25% of peak capacity over a year (or any at night)  and we are now entering the second week in which wind power  is delivering less than 10% of its installed capacity.

So, having decided that we need to double the secure generating capacity of the grid and install 35,000,000 kerbside charging points in order to replace the cars, you now want to add another 50% for trucks and buses and a couple of million truck charging points .

Should we build more nukes, or burn more gas?

Why not just use diesel, and save the environmental and financial cost of replacing the entire fleet of vehicles, plus doubling the number of conventional power stations?

[hamdani yusuf]

Why should we go through a middleman, instead of directly use the electric energy or storing it into battery?

Because over 70% of energy use is not electrical, and a fair bit of electrical energy is used for heating, where hydrogen would be more efficient. Plus hydrogen storage is very cheap and simple.

How much is in chemical usage?
How much is specifically in hydrogen form?
Electricity is the most fluid form of energy. It's easy to distribute and transform into other forms of energy.
Hydrogen explosion is one of the most common examples cited in industrial process safety training. In gas form, it's easy to leak and produce explosive mixture with oxygen in the air.

[hamdani yusuf]

Quite possibly. Now consider a battery delivering 250A at 400V, and short-circuit one cell. Or partially open-circuit a cell so the internal impedance rises. Not a pretty sight. Which is why batteries are generally not made subject to bending or impact stresses.

It is not necessary to remove the chassis materials entirely. Just enough to reduce its mass to be replaced by the structural battery, hence the final overall construction is still as strong as currently existing BEV.

[hamdani yusuf]

Indeed, I have been offered a solar roof at pretty much the cost of a tiled roof. Problem is that I already have a roof, as does everyone else, so you need to spend another £30,000 or so per car to install an independent charging system. Except that most people will want to charge their cars at night, when the roof isn't working.

That's why you'll also need the battery. You generate excessive energy during the day and spend it during the night.

[hamdani yusuf]

Solar electricity  is not reliable in the UK, never delivers more than 25% of peak capacity over a year (or any at night)  and we are now entering the second week in which wind power  is delivering less than 10% of its installed capacity.

So, having decided that we need to double the secure generating capacity of the grid and install 35,000,000 kerbside charging points in order to replace the cars, you now want to add another 50% for trucks and buses and a couple of million truck charging points .

When the solar cost is cheap enough,  it would be economically feasible to quadruple solar capacity to compensate for the deficiency. Tony Seba has mentioned this in one of his videos.

[hamdani yusuf]

Should we build more nukes, or burn more gas?

Why not just use diesel, and save the environmental and financial cost of replacing the entire fleet of vehicles, plus doubling the number of conventional power stations?

Because of the variable cost I mentioned earlier.
Fossil fuels require exploration, extraction, refinery, storage, and distribution, which are expensive and dangerous. I know because I've worked in those fields before. I was the lead system engineer of a fossil fuels storage and distribution facility project. I've also worked on other projects in extraction and refinery facilities. Before that, I've also worked as electric and instrumentation maintenance personnel in a natural gas purification plant.

Some of my close relatives are still working there. Safety is one of the highest concerns, which is justified by recent explosion in an oil refinery facility.

On the other hand, variable costs in wind and solar is negligible. Almost all of their costs are fixed, either for building them or maintenance.

[alancalverd]

It is not necessary to remove the chassis materials entirely. Just enough to reduce its mass to be replaced by the structural battery, hence the final overall construction is still as strong as currently existing BEV.

What works very well in practice is to make the chassis from entirely structural materials that can be assembled by bolts or welds, and cut and welded if they get bent, then insert a battery whose shape is optimised for electrical performance, protected from mechanical damage by the chassis.

There is one exception: the upper surfaces of an aircraft can usefully be made from solar cell materials because those surfaces are fairly uniform and not normally subject to impact.

[alancalverd]

When the solar cost is cheap enough,  it would be economically feasible to quadruple solar capacity to compensate for the deficiency.

They still only work half the time, and sadly that's exactly when most people will be wanting to use their cars, not charge them. So for every car on the road you need a new roof and another battery to save the charge to transfer to the car later. It's all getting very big and expensive!

[alancalverd]

Because of the variable cost I mentioned earlier.
Fossil fuels require exploration, extraction, refinery, storage, and distribution, which are expensive and dangerous.

And we know exactly how expensive (5 p per mile) and how dangerous (not very - few cars catch fire spontaneously).

The rational objection to fossil fuels is their finite quantity. The problem is that we don't have a feasible alternative that can support the present level of energy consumption. Which suggests that the rational solution is to reduce consumption to a level that can be sustained by renewables.

[alancalverd]

How much is in chemical usage?

about 69%. The other 1% is horses.

How much is specifically in hydrogen form?

Not much these days, but until 1963, about half of the static use was hydrogen. Now mostly replaced by methane.

[hamdani yusuf]

They still only work half the time, and sadly that's exactly when most people will be wanting to use their cars, not charge them. So for every car on the road you need a new roof and another battery to save the charge to transfer to the car later. It's all getting very big and expensive!

Let's say that a  self sufficient system in The Sahara requires 10 kW solar panel and 100 kWh battery. If it's installed in a place with sunlight intensity only half of that, you need twice amount of solar panel, but the battery is the same.

[hamdani yusuf]

And we know exactly how expensive (5 p per mile) and how dangerous (not very - few cars catch fire spontaneously).

If you generate your own electricity, it would be less expensive, e. g. 0 p per mile. If the numbers look too small, try to change the unit of distance to a bigger one, such as a light second.

[hamdani yusuf]

The $200 million “Big Battery”, installed in South Australia in 2017 by Elon Musk’s Tesla company, ..................

 Neoen announced plans to increase the battery complex’s size by 50% to 150MW, to be competed in the first half of 2020. It remains the largest battery in the world.

So the battery costs about twice as much per kilowatt as a gas generator plant and doesn't actually generate electricity.

I try to be open minded as far as possible. I don't reject new ideas out right unless they are evidently unfeasible.
If Neoen calculates that gas generator is actually more profitable than battery, they should have gone to that direction, not increasing their battery size instead. They can compare fairly since they have the experience with both of them.
Their financial reports should show if their calculations were false, and their stakeholders will react accordingly.
Again,  you seem to miss the variable cost in your calculations. The investment is not a one time purchase and then stop and forget. They still have to operate and maintain the facilities. It's only economically feasible if the overall cost is significantly less than the benefits.   

[hamdani yusuf]

How much is in chemical usage?

about 69%. The other 1% is horses.

How much is specifically in hydrogen form?

Not much these days, but until 1963, about half of the static use was hydrogen. Now mostly replaced by methane.

How would you distribute hydrogen safely and economically? Are there investors who firmly believe that hydrogen as energy source is economically feasible so they put their money into it?

[alancalverd]

The gas grid presently holds and distributes 35% of the UK's total energy. Until 1963, 50% of the gas was hydrogen.  It has been economically feasible and indeed profitable since 1790.

[Bored chemist]

How would you distribute hydrogen safely and economically? Are there investors who firmly believe that hydrogen as energy source is economically feasible so they put their money into it?

https://www.keele.ac.uk/sustainable-futures/ourchallengethemes/providingcleanenergyreducingcarbonemissions/hydeploy/

[alancalverd]

Let's say that a  self sufficient system in The Sahara requires 10 kW solar panel and 100 kWh battery.

You could say that, but a static 10 kW panel will only produce ~ 2.5 kW average during clear daylight and nothing at night so you need to install about 30 kW of generating capacity to charge the battery during the day. But if you are also using power during the day, you need to install 60 kW of peak generating capacity to supply  8.3 kW continuously.

UK energy consumption is about 5 kW per capita, so to supply the UK alone, from a hot desert location, you need to install 40,000,000 x 60 kW solar panels, each with a 100 kWh battery. At 50 sq ft per kW, that's about 500 square miles of panel: just feasible, perhaps, but it's not a happy environment for batteries and you have to find some way of preventing the whole thing getting covered with sand.

Now let's get that power to the UK. Say we install a 1,000,000 V DC cable (the reactive losses over 3000 miles would be very expensive with an AC supply). It has to carry 330,000 amps. That's a very fat wire.

[Bored chemist]

. It has to carry 330,000 amps. That's a very fat wire.

It may make more sense to use a collection of wires- preferable with interconnections between them.
What some people would call... a "grid".

Why are you so resistant to this idea?