Topics In Demand
Notification
New

No notification found.

For mass production cars, Battery Electric Powertrain is the future, not Hydrogen Fuel Cell
For mass production cars, Battery Electric Powertrain is the future, not Hydrogen Fuel Cell

November 8, 2022

168

0

 

  • BEVs has 76% well-to-wheel efficiency while FCEVs has 30%
  • OEMs strategy and investment clearly goes for BEV future
  • Charging time and range problem to get technical and customer acceptance in near future (5-8 years)
  • Heavy vehicle powertrain future to become clear as technology unlocks
     

Organisations are ready with their one foot in the future to adopt Battery Electric Vehicle (BEV); which will be used to mass produce small vehicles such as motorcycles, cars, SUVs and Light Trucks, not Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle (FCEV). In the case of heavy vehicles, whether it be a truck or bus, to have a battery based propulsion system is a challenge. This will involve putting large batteries, increased cost, long charging hours, large space requirement for charging stations, etc. which is where FCEV have an advantage.

With respect to OEM strategies, most OEM R&D investments are planned till 2030 and beyond to support more of BEVs and less of FCEV. Many OEMs are investing in FCEV to test the waters rather than as strategic plan to further investment, which includes BMW, Toyota, Hyundai, etc. FCEV that is planned to run in small cars are limited to a few companies such as Toyota Mirai, Hyundai Nexo, BMW iX5, etc. while there are numerous BEVs on road and more are in pipeline in comparison.

 

BEV vs FCEV Comparison

 

Initial Investment and Running Cost

In the context of the initial investment incurred for customers, the cost of the battery cells are declining in price due to the rise in investments and increased market acceptance. Meanwhile, the cost of fuel cells are also noticed to decrease but at a slower rate.

When it comes to the vehicles itself in comparison, the hydrogen storage tank and fuel cells are complexly packed in FCEV while BEVs are simple and comparatively cheaper. It is also observed that the investment to build a hydrogen supply chain is certainly a costly affair but the future of power systems are hydrogen and hence, it will become more or less an inevitable expense.

According to research paper published in Royal Society of Chemistry, cost of battery cell per kwh is about 100 USD in 2020, which is expected to come down further to 30-50$ by 2025-28. The Hydrogen Council  has identified that, FCEV’s total cost of ownership will become comparable to BEV’s by 2030s in small cars and it will become cheaper in case of medium and large vehicles. When it comes to running cost FCEV, it will require sophisticated transport, storage and filling which in effect will increase the cost and complications, while BEVs needs electricity which will be cheaper and efficient.


 

Graph

Source: Battery cost forecasting: a review of methods and results with an outlook to 2050 - Energy & Environmental Science (RSC Publishing) DOI:10.1039/D1EE01530C
 

Range and Refuelling / Charging

In case of FCEV refuelling, it takes about 3-5 minutes which will add another 600 km range. While this sounds promising, the risk of hydrogen explosion is still a challenge one needs to consider. When it comes to BEV charging, it can take about 6-12 hours for home-based charging and about 20 min to 2 hours for fast charging, which will add about 200-400 km range. FCEV clearly have an advantage here, which has larger range and shorter refuelling compared to BEVs. In the long run, buses and trucks which are usually operated by a company in large number, will face a significant challenge of parking and charging BEVs with space and power supply constraints, hence giving better prospects for FCEVs. With the advent of several innovations in the charging space to control the impedance/movement of ions and to increase the voltage, it is expected that chargers of the future will be faster and highly efficient.
 

Efficiency

Wheel-to-well efficiency is high for BEVs (76%), in case of FCEVs there is significant loss in electrolysis, compression and transportation (30%). Innovators are trying to make both - hydrogen supply chain and fuel cells more efficient, but as the difference is significantly high, it is not expected to become sustainable in the future. This efficiency can only be overlooked when the hydrogen is green and application needs high flexibility (like construction machinery, special trucks, generators, etc.).
 

Infrastructure


 

Infrastructure

As the world is gearing up for the electrification of transport sector, there is huge investments that are being made to produce more green energy, new transmission lines, charging stations, etc. In the case of the hydrogen supply chain, building is costly, unknown and risky. This is currently being investigated and attempted more by US, EU, China, India, etc. and less by others. Penetrating the hydrogen is equivalent to penetrating the unknown as it involves high risks thus leading to apprehension and reduced future prospects of the same.

Despite some pushbacks, challenges and drawbacks most OEMs have adopted a BEV strategy for the future of their light vehicle. The FCEV in question should be reconsidered and reassessed only when there is a possible solution for storage, transportation of hydrogen and realistic fuel cell cost.


References: 

  1. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/operations/our-insights/global-infrastructure-initiative/voices/unlocking-hydrogens-power-for-long-haul-freight-transport
  2. https://www.carwow.co.uk/blog/hydrogen-vs-electric-cars#gref
  3. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/visualized-battery-vs-hydrogen-fuel-cell/
  4. https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=1bf1cbf0-ac2f-4b39-a3de-2df77a9a515e
  5. https://www.iea.org/articles/batteries-and-hydrogen-technology-keys-for-a-clean-energy-future




About the Author

Arun K T, Deputy Manager, Strategy and M&A, HindujaTech

 

 


That the contents of third-party articles/blogs published here on the website, and the interpretation of all information in the article/blogs such as data, maps, numbers, opinions etc. displayed in the article/blogs and views or the opinions expressed within the content are solely of the author's; and do not reflect the opinions and beliefs of NASSCOM or its affiliates in any manner. NASSCOM does not take any liability w.r.t. content in any manner and will not be liable in any manner whatsoever for any kind of liability arising out of any act, error or omission. The contents of third-party article/blogs published, are provided solely as convenience; and the presence of these articles/blogs should not, under any circumstances, be considered as an endorsement of the contents by NASSCOM in any manner; and if you chose to access these articles/blogs , you do so at your own risk.


Automotive Product Engineering Services & Digital Technology Services

© Copyright nasscom. All Rights Reserved.