Stefan Bernstein explains how the EU/Greenland critical raw materials partnership benefits GreenRoc. Watch the full video here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
DC to DC does simplify things, less electronics so lower cost and higher reliability in the long term. Also less electrical losses.
Some news on Monday would be nice.
Yes, that was my memory too Notes, but my notes were not clear.
Two cents, figured that out afterwards, thanks though.
13thmonkey, the upper limit of AC power that an EV can take is not 7.7kW - it is limited by the car's own onboard charger. Early Tesla's (like that white one at the AFC launch the other day) had an onboard charger that could take up to 22kW AC, but current models can only take up to 16.5kW AC. A Nissan Leaf can only take 6.6kW AC I think. They all can obviously take a lot more DC, but this is limited by the car too. Tesla Model S and X top out at 120kW DC, whereas the Model 3 can take up to 250kW DC, and the Porsche Taycan can take 270kW DC.
Yes, although adaptions is a strong word. The cable standards apply, so your hybrid plug-ins might only be AC, as they expect to only be charged from the 13amp mains or from the engine. So most BV's will be able to take DC or AC and will have different max powers depending on whether it is AC or DC you are charging with. AC will be lower as the high power rectification components are expensive and keeping them cool is difficult. DC has less of a limitation. I don't think that any BV's will need modification to work with either AC or DC they'll work with both. My point was that inverting the DC output from the FC to AC is expensive, and will create losses, so DC to DC has no conversions and is inherently better in every possible way.
Some Tesla's for instance can take more from a fast charger than other models, not because of the size of the battery, but the control circuitry to manage the charging.
13thMonkey. I realise that a Fuelcell produces dc current. However I was not sure what happens when an AC current is delivered to a battery. Does it need conversion back to dc? If so does the ev need adaptations to take both ac and dc current?
Yes, an FC will be DC, so to make AC you'll need an inverter, which the car will then rectify back to DC, both of which are current limited and lossy, so DC to DC would be more efficient. I'm thinking that the size of the batteries are on the small side, but it's been noted that they can be expanded, it all depends on the expectation of the public, if I dropped my car off in a supermarket carpark and got back at least as many miles as it took to get there I'd be happy, you don't need to get to full every time. Motorways on the other hand i'd like to get a good chunk of charge in 40-60 mins.
That would be it. So there were greater efficiencies charging from the fuel cell/battery than from the mains to the cat battery.
Thanks 13thm
Obviously I don't know about AB's comments, but the batteries will all be DC, and as such you can either have DC:DC charging or AC:DC charging, which then requires hardware in the car to convert from AC to DC, this limits the current/power that can be supplied. DC to DC is where the action is at with high power chargers, super chargers and the like.
Not 100% on this but AC will get you up to 7.7KW, DC can be a lot more than this, the hardware required in car is simpler and can cope more easily.
Indeed, thanks for pointing out. Just in case it gets lost did anyone note the comments about moves to dc powered electric vehicles? Did I misunderstand that?
BumbleB that's how I thought it read, but the clarity may be beneficial.
13thmonkey according to my notes it was the hydrogen generator equipment that was so expensive, not the fuel cells. So they have had to scale back the project to some extent.
BumbleB, thanks, and to clarify, it was the rest of the southern plant that was too expensive, not the AFC elements?
I will start with Southern. The project is not dead. Southern Project was too expensive. They have had to redesign the layout of their plant, and will generate less hydrogen. They need to apply to the Queensland Govt for fresh grant aid. Which is what is happening now.
The open day for investors was attended by Adam Bond, John Rennocks, Jim Gibson, Gerry Agnew, and Graham Lewis (Chief Finance Officer). As might be expected the atmosphere was quite different to the AGM.
The meeting was kicked off with a short introduction from Graham Lewis then moved into presentation by Adam Bond, a short presentation by Jim Gibson then a tour of the new system which was working outside, and finally a question session which was closed at about 12.45 as there was a Board meeting that afternoon.
I will start with the new fuel cell system. It was located within a smart looking container, with AFC logo, with a second smaller container housing the Multi Source Power equipment. Both containers were topped with solar panels, those of the AFC container sloped over air vents necessary for aeration purposes.
We saw inside the working container. Most obvious up front was a large column that was scrubbing air before it entered the cells, and opposite the electrics. Behind that were two stacks, tanks containing electrolyte and of course the system of piping to feed the stacks. The stacks have evolved since we saw them last, they no longer sit within a cartridge and look a slightly different shape, do doubt due to the modelling that was done on fluid flow a year or two back. The water produced drains into containers under the system, and this is waste product discharged to a drain. I know people have spoken about the commercial value of such water in the past, but with small systems it would just not be economic. The containers contain two 10 kW stacks.
The system has operated outdoors in temperatures of -3 C with no problems this week. The idea is to try to keep them running slowly at low power continuously charging the MSP battery. This reduces strain on the fuel cells with switching on and off, and the resulting temperature changes being one of the major factors causing damage to catalyst layers. This way it is intended that the system should have a long life, beyond four years.
With the doors open the fuel cell produced some noise, due to the circulation of air. On the day they had sensor leads coming out of the box so the doors could not be fully closed, but as they were closed too slightly the noise was considerably reduced. Nothing like the impact of, say, a diesel generator.
Good to see a final product in the flesh and operating!