By Peter LaDelfe
Los Alamos
I’m writing this in response to Doug Reilly’s Op/Ed, “Electric Vehicles Not Quite the Panacea…,” LA Daily Post, January 4, 2024 (link). While I disagree with none of what Mr. Reilly says, I believe he has overlooked important factors. Most notably, he treats battery-electric vehicles as the apex technology for transportation, ignoring the hydrogen technologies and other emerging developments.
With regard to hydrogen, I will admit from the outset that charging a battery from the electrical source will always be more efficient than converting electricity to hydrogen and then converting the hydrogen to motion, by any means. However, there are considerations which make that energy loss worth the cost.
Most notable among these considerations is that it is highly unlikely that a battery pack capable of powering a long-range airliner will ever be light enough to be practical. A large aircraft can be powered by electric motor driven propellers using current from hydrogen fuel cells (HFCs) or by burning the hydrogen in jet engines. The latter are heat engines with efficiencies limited by the laws of thermodynamics to the 25-30% range while the current technology on hydrogen fuel cells is achieving slightly more than 70% efficiency with improvements still possible. A few enterprises have experimental hydrogen-powered aircraft operating today. The remaining details are why we have engineers.
HFC powered automobiles can be refueled in 5 minutes, eliminating the range anxiety inherent in today’s plug-in electrics. Again, I’ll concede that for an individual who does not need range, the plug-in may be the practical choice. However, we need to be aware that Hyundai has had an HFC vehicle on the market since 2008 and they’ve been joined by Toyota and Honda in southern California. Also, the Toyota dealer in Honolulu, Hawaii sells or leases the Mirai, Toyota’s HFC product, and sells hydrogen he makes on-site. The problem? Limited availability of hydrogen refueling stations. These technologies not only exist but they are currently marketed. We need only expand supply.
Meanwhile, Germany has an HFC commuter train in operation and Scotland is building HFC inter-island ferries. There are certainly other examples of which I am not aware.
Mr. Reilly’s comments about lithium and the rare earths are absolutely correct but they don’t tell the whole story. The United States has reasonable deposits of the rare earths but, our industries have found it more economical to buy from China, allowing our production capacity to atrophy. I am aware of at least one company attempting to rebuild domestic capacity. An excellent substitute for lithium in batteries is sodium which is extremely abundant. The problem, here, is that for equivalent energy capacity, the sodium battery is heavier than the lithium. An optimally designed HFC vehicle would use a much smaller battery than those in a plug-in to handle peak loads. My guestimate; 1-2%. As such, less lithium is needed or the weight of a sodium battery is tolerable. That’s why we have engineers.
Mr. Reilly touched on end-of-life disposal problems. There is a company now recycling lithium batteries, extracting the valuable materials for use in new batteries.
My final message is, don’t write off electric and related technology vehicles; they may be our salvation.
