289
submitted 8 months ago by SeaJ@lemm.ee to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] tal@lemmy.today 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Aside from hybrids, Toyota has also put a lot of work into hydrogen cars. Those have some real benefits -- range, fast fueling time, running the heater is "free", like in a gasoline vehicle and doesn't hurt range, don't have range reduction in cold environments -- but they're more-expensive to fuel than a pure EV, because you've got the overhead of conversion from electricity to hydrogen.

I don't think that the EV user experience is as good as the hybrid gasoline/electric experience or the hydrogen user experience, but I also don't think that hybrids are gonna be able to achieve enough carbon reduction. Like, if we had figured out a really good, cost-effective way to do carbon sequestration, that'd be one thing. But that isn't the case in 2024.

And if it comes down to hydrogen or EVs, I think that ultimately, the lower fueling costs of EVs will dominate.

[-] dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 19 points 8 months ago

Do you have a hydrogen car?

Right now, there are 59 public hydrogen fueling stations in all of the United States, all of which are in CA. Good luck on a road trip. Even in a big city like Los Angeles they are hard to find and far apart. Pretty awesome to drive 30 minutes in traffic just to fuel up!!

And before you say something like, "we just need to build out the infrastructure;" think how fucking expensive that will be. We already have a MASSIVE infrastructure for electricity and for gas stations. Each hydrogen station costs around $5 million to build. There are roughly 116,000 gas stations in the US, so even adding a quarter of that number in hydrogen would cost $143 billion. It would be better to spend that on beefing up the electrical grid, especially in places like Texas who can't even handle a tough winter.

As far as the experience, there is nothing better than pulling up to your house and plugging in. It absolutely sucks having to go to a dirty gas station and stand outside in cold or heat or rain while some homeless person asks for money to fill up their car to get to a doctors appointment. Take that gas station experience and then spend time trying to find a far away hydrogen station to fuel up. Even on road trips, I can take a 30 minute lunch break to get 50-80% before driving again. In a hydrogen car I'll be lucky to find a place to fuel up at all.

Finally, the economics of hydrogen for cars is dumb. Why spend money converting electricity into hydrogen, then put it in a tanker truck that uses diesel to drive it to a station, where it takes electricity to run the pumps, to put hydrogen in a car that TURNS HYDROGEN INTO ELECTRICITY. Compare that to just sending electricity down some wires to charge a battery.

[-] Iceblade02@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

People said the same thing when BEVs were coming out. Personally, I think the main hidden benefits of hydrogen isn't fast refueling and range, but rather weight and ease of storage.

Hydrogen may be the solution to enable mass adoption of variable renewable power plants, allowing relatively cheap energy storage between seasons. Doesn't matter if you only get 50% efficiency if you can produce it when electricity is dirt cheap and then store it nigh indefinitely.

As for the weight - the real money in vehicles is in the commercial sector, where weight is precious. Any weight lugging around batteries is dead weight - and hydrogen means less weight than lithium batteries.

[-] Nomecks@lemmy.ca 12 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I don't have to stand in -30 weather filling up my EV. Hydrogen is a step back. Also, humans suck at not leaking gasses, and unburned hydrogen isn't great for the environment.

[-] MeanEYE@lemmy.world -3 points 8 months ago

That's such a shit excuse. You do realize CNG is a thing? It's a compressed natural gas powered vehicles. They are everywhere. Where I live every gas station has a connector for one of those. Hose like any other. You click and it starts filling.

[-] Nomecks@lemmy.ca 3 points 8 months ago

I plug in my ev and go to sleep. No worrying about gas stations, high pressure gasses, leaks, price gouging etc.

Not to mention, BEVs have the simplest drivetrain ever. I'm half convinced Toyota and GM are going hydrogen so they can maintain their spare parts businesses. Though for reals it's likely because they missed out on all those sweet BEV patents.

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 11 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Do you have an EV?

For those of us who can charge at home, nothing beats the user experience of just plugging your car in overnight so you always have plenty of charge and never have to think about finding a gas station. Nothing beats the silence or feeling of effortless acceleration.

It’s only charging on road trips that os currently not as good a user experience, but those are uncommon, not as bad as people online think and getting better all the time.

[-] JimmyChanga@lemmy.world -3 points 8 months ago

I've been in favour of hydrogen for years over electric. Honda had some really interesting ideas and concepts, plus a long term study in california. Mercedes initially looked to be heading into hydrogen over electric then pivoted, but BMW look to have just decided to move more to hydrogen from their electric development... Does look like batteries are beginning to take a step up though. Should be interesting in the next few years

[-] HerrBeter@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago

Because hydrogen is primarily made from natural gas (fossil fuel). Hydrogen is not a viable solution since efficiency is crap

[-] MeanEYE@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago

Hydrogen being viable fuel has nothing to do with its production. Its viability comes from high energy density, ability to refuel faster, better performance in the winter compared to EVs, etc. Production, sure, currently it's fossil fuel based because that's the cheapest way to produce it. The thing is, it's not the only way to produce it. There's electrolysis, then there are bacteria which can produce it, etc. If the demand jumps so will the production and prices will go down. Plus there's no OPEC controlling prices.

But all of it matters very little. It means you can use fossil fuels to produce greener fuel, and then just switch along the line somewhere. Far easier transition.

[-] JimmyChanga@lemmy.world -2 points 8 months ago

A little outdated that view, there's been several breakthroughs recently and production cost/ efficiency. The shear convenience of only having a three minute refill time instead of recharging problems etc

[-] HerrBeter@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago

Hydrogen is a horribly volatile compound, inherently unsafe. Regarding costs, I'll believe it when I see it.

Besides there isn't enough of vital rare earths for the fuel cells. Currently it's a dead end.

But do indulge me with links if you will

this post was submitted on 01 Mar 2024
289 points (97.1% liked)

News

23376 readers
3341 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS