Revving up for a greener future: Honda's 2024 line-up features electric and fuel-cell...

[DragonSlayer101]

What just happened? Japanese auto major Honda has offered an outlook for its US business in 2024, confirming plans to launch multiple zero-emission vehicles over the next twelve months. The company took its sweet time launching its first EV in the North American market, but Honda is seemingly making up for it with the impending launch of several new models as it tries to compete with Toyota, GM, Ford, and others in the increasingly lucrative EV space.

In a statement this week, American Honda said that it will launch three new zero-emission vehicles this year, including two regular-battery electric SUVs and a fuel-cell one. The two battery-powered SUVs will be the Honda Prologue and Acura ZDX, while the third will be the fuel-cell version of the company's popular compact crossover, CR-V.

In addition to these three, Honda also plans to launch a hybrid version of the Civic this summer. The car will be offered in both sedan and hatchback body styles, and the company expects them to account for around 40 percent of all Civic sales going forward.

The Prologue will go on sale "in the coming months," starting with California and other ZEV states. It will also roll out simultaneously in other EV-friendly markets like Texas and Florida. As for the ZDX, it will go on sale in "early 2024," with the company choosing to bypass dealers and taking all orders online. This will be the first car from the Honda stable to adopt a 100 percent online sales model, following in the footsteps of newer EV companies like Tesla and Rivian.

The CR-V Fuel Cell Vehicle (FCEV) will also debut this year, but its exact launch date is still a mystery. According to Honda, it will be based on the standard CR-V and will mark "North America's first production vehicle to combine a plug-in feature with FCEV technology in one model."

The upcoming EVs and the FCEV are part of Honda's goals of converting its entire portfolio to 100 percent zero-emission by 2040. The company has also committed to going fully carbon-neutral by 2050. To achieve its targets, Honda says it is executing a "step-by-step smart electrification strategy" with an increase in hybrid volume and the simultaneous introduction of its first mass-market electric vehicles.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/101577-honda-2024-roadmap-includes-2-electric-suvs-fuel.html

 

[yRaz]

I don't see hydrogen ever seriously catching on. Energy density of hydrogen in a pressurized container is lower than that of a battery. On top of that, most hydrogen is not "green hydrogen." Making enough green hydrogen to replace Petroleum products would require so much energy from the grid that we'd have to start turning coal powerplants back on.

 

[toooooot]

I don't see hydrogen ever seriously catching on. Energy density of hydrogen in a pressurized container is lower than that of a battery. On top of that, most hydrogen is not "green hydrogen." Making enough green hydrogen to replace Petroleum products would require so much energy from the grid that we'd have to start turning coal powerplants back on.

Energy is not needed all the time, we do not stop making it during those times.

Hydrogen can be made when people need less power. Then it can be used in cars.
I imagine almost fully automated hydrogen factories making it when demand is lower.
Safety is another issue though. It will be hard to make it affordable for this reason alone.

 

[Dreadcthulhu]

Existing hydrogen, made by steam reformation of methane, is quite expensive. Most of the stations in California are charging $36 / kg right now. 1 Kg of hydrogen conveniently has almost exactly the same energy density as one gallon of gasoline; the fuel cells themselves are roughly twice as efficient as a good gas engine. So cost wise driving on hydrogen is basically equivalent to driving a gas car if gas was $18.00 a gallon. It is of course possible to make cleaner hydrogen from water using solar or wind energy, but that is even more expensive than making it from methane. Electricity from wind/solar would have to get absurdly cheap to get hydrogen cost competitive with even gasoline, but if you can make electricity that cheaply then driving a battery electric vehicle would also be silly cheap.

Here is a website that lists H2 stations in CA, and has prices. https://h2-ca.com/

 

[yRaz]

Energy is not needed all the time, we do not stop making it during those times.

Hydrogen can be made when people need less power. Then it can be used in cars.
I imagine almost fully automated hydrogen factories making it when demand is lower.
Safety is another issue though. It will be hard to make it affordable for this reason alone.

Yes, some can be made during non-peak hours, but not enough to replace the 20 million barrels of oil the US uses everyday.

 

[MakeMSGreatAgain]

I'm confident hydrogen can be a big part of our future, but not yet. They still have a ways to go on efficiently producing it and we're probably a good 25-50 years from that, but they have been slowly getting closer.

Battery EV's aren't going to take over though, as at a lot of charging stations the cost to fill up is sometimes more than to fill up with gasoline. They need to get the charging prices down to realistic levels and considerably more stations that actually work properly, all the time, in order for B-EV's to be attractive to the masses. Though they still are completely viable for those who can charge at home and don't need to do much long distance travel, or still have a ICE vehicle to use when needed.

 

[letsgoiowa]

I'm one of those people that really love novel and clever solutions to things, but sadly hydrogen isn't the right solution for everyday cars. Semis actually could seriously benefit because they need fast refueling and often stop at specific designated locations. Everyday cars, though, lose the following benefits:
- Ability to simply plug in at home
- Electric stations taking minimal space and being able to go theoretically anywhere you can run cabling to (grocery store parking lots being one I see all the time)
- Cost
- Hazard level

 

[Theinsanegamer]

I'm one of those people that really love novel and clever solutions to things, but sadly hydrogen isn't the right solution for everyday cars. Semis actually could seriously benefit because they need fast refueling and often stop at specific designated locations. Everyday cars, though, lose the following benefits:
- Ability to simply plug in at home
- Electric stations taking minimal space and being able to go theoretically anywhere you can run cabling to (grocery store parking lots being one I see all the time)
- Cost
- Hazard level

Disagree on the hazard. Hydrogen is far safer then gasoline that we use today, and doesnt spontaneously combust like EV batteries.

Semis will likely use it, and I can see half ton pickups like the F-150 use it, as even at that level batteries have serious issues with weight and capacity.

I don't see hydrogen ever seriously catching on. Energy density of hydrogen in a pressurized container is lower than that of a battery. On top of that, most hydrogen is not "green hydrogen." Making enough green hydrogen to replace Petroleum products would require so much energy from the grid that we'd have to start turning coal powerplants back on.

Hydrogen makes way more sense for heavy duty stuff. Construction equipment, ships, semi trucks, ece where the weight of batteries makes them prohibitively expensive and useless. The issues with EV busses show that batteries dont always scale well, and something used for long hours will also benefit from shorter refueling times.

For small cars, SUVs, ece they dont make much sense due to cost, but at semi truck level hypothetical hydrogen trucks are cheaper then EVs to produce and maintain.

There's also the issue of electric infrastructure. Charging a fleet of EV semis takes more electricity then the factory that makes them, and building service to thousands of fleet centers is a logistical nightmare. Hydrogen helps centralize the power use just like refineries do.

 

[Marco Mint]

I consider anyone using EV's today as being early adopters. The tech just isn't mature enough for my needs, so I'll continue with diesel/petrol cars until such a time as we can get huge range and 10 minutes to fully charged. My brother used to get over 600 miles out of a tank on his old, 1.8 litre, diesel golf.
Also, my current car is 17 years old and running as well as the day it rolled off the production line. Sure, a newer car would be nice but I don't need one. Also, what kind of condition will a current EV battery be after 17 years of hard use I wonder?

 

[Mr Majestyk]

Existing hydrogen, made by steam reformation of methane, is quite expensive. Most of the stations in California are charging $36 / kg right now. 1 Kg of hydrogen conveniently has almost exactly the same energy density as one gallon of gasoline; the fuel cells themselves are roughly twice as efficient as a good gas engine. So cost wise driving on hydrogen is basically equivalent to driving a gas car if gas was $18.00 a gallon. It is of course possible to make cleaner hydrogen from water using solar or wind energy, but that is even more expensive than making it from methane. Electricity from wind/solar would have to get absurdly cheap to get hydrogen cost competitive with even gasoline, but if you can make electricity that cheaply then driving a battery electric vehicle would also be silly cheap.

Here is a website that lists H2 stations in CA, and has prices. https://h2-ca.com/

Volumetric energy density of hydrogen is what matters and it's terrible. You can't compare 1kg of hydrogen gas to 1kg of liquid fuel as their volume storage requirement are vastly different. Toyota has wasted billions on using hydrogen as a fuel in ICE engines and you need to virtually take up the entire boot with huge tank. Power output of the engine is poor too. Volumetric energy density of hydrogen is half that of already crappy Li Ion battery's. Fuel cells are a far better use of hydrogen but you still have the problem of need a 5000psi hydrogen tank on the car and hydrogen is costly to produce. And why would anyone set up a hydrogen fueling network in light of EV's charging network costing enough.

 

[MakeMSGreatAgain]

Volumetric energy density of hydrogen is what matters and it's terrible. You can't compare 1kg of hydrogen gas to 1kg of liquid fuel as their volume storage requirement are vastly different. Toyota has wasted billions on using hydrogen as a fuel in ICE engines and you need to virtually take up the entire boot with huge tank. Power output of the engine is poor too. Volumetric energy density of hydrogen is half that of already crappy Li Ion battery's. Fuel cells are a far better use of hydrogen but you still have the problem of need a 5000psi hydrogen tank on the car and hydrogen is costly to produce. And why would anyone set up a hydrogen fueling network in light of EV's charging network costing enough.

Yes it is, but the weight energy density of compressed hydrogen is pretty close to gasoline / petrol and diesel. That is most likely where a HFC-EV will benefit over B-EV's.The point some of us are trying to make though is some vehicles have plenty of space available like semi tractor trailors / lorries and heavy equipment like excavators. Tanks can e strategically placed to have minimal or zero impact on storage or equipment capacity. Weight is a problem for these vehicles, and batteries also weigh a lot. The vehicles may also need quick refuel/recharges, and while batteries have gotten better they still take more than 10 minutes and takes hours for a full charge. They have the room for compressed hydrogen tanks.