• stealthnerd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Where does all of the anti hydrogen rhetoric come from? Hydrogen has its issues for sure but so does electric. Hydrogen has advantages to electric, namely range and refueling time, which may make it a better choice, at least for certain applications.

        What’s so horrible about Toyota investing in it? At least someone is giving it a shot and they actually have a production automobile that uses it.

        Here we are going all in on electric with a grid that can’t support it, charging times that are too slow, driving range that’s too low and housing that can’t accommodate it but hydrogen is somehow a crazy idea?

        • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          I get the feeling the same people who were anti nuclear are now pushing anti hydrogen without realizing they’re falling right into fossil fuel’s division.

        • zurohki@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Because there’s no real attempt to roll out hydrogen infrastructure and almost all the attempts we’re seeing to paint hydrogen as the future are actually just anti-EV FUD. Hydrogen is the future! … but it isn’t ready yet, so keep buying gas cars for now.

          Same goes for nuclear, at least in my country - the political party that’s now talking up nuclear while in opposition didn’t say a word about nuclear while they were in government. They were trying to fund new coal plants. They’re talking about nuclear to slow down renewables, they don’t actually plan to build new nuclear plants. They want to protect their big donors in the coal industry.

          Hydrogen fuel cells probably have a future somewhere, but it isn’t in cars. The filling stations are too expensive and the hydrogen itself is too expensive.

          Battery EVs are about to pass the range of fuel cell EVs, you know? They can’t actually hold that much hydrogen. And they only fill faster if the filling station has a long break between vehicles - fill a couple of cars in a row and you’ll be there for 20 minutes.

        • Hypx@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          It comes from brainwashed BEV owners and companies. In reality, it is a huge greenwashing industry designed to distract from the fact that fossil fuel consumption continues. It is only a matter of time before the BEV fad ends and we begin taking real ideas more seriously. Hydrogen will be one of them. So will nuclear in all likelihood.

          • stealthnerd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            It will be interesting to see how this all plays out that’s for sure. Every time I drive by a rest stop on the highway I imagine what the gas lines would look like if those people were instead lining up to spend 20+ minutes minimum at a charging station.

            Even if you put a charger in every parking space it would likely be a problem. Those lots fill up as it is and I can’t even fathom the electrical feeds required for that.

            I think the people saying “oh it’s just electricity we already have that” are a bit dilusional. It’s going to require enormous investment into infrastructure and even then it may not be feasible.

            I think it’s one of those things that seems great when only a handful of people are doing it but will become a nightmare as more EVs end up on the road.

            Its great for those who have a dedicated place to park their car, can charge at home and only commute a short distance back and forth to work but it falls short for many.

            • Hypx@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              It reminds me of those who think “food comes from the grocery store!” And not realize that there is an entire infrastructure behind that. Electricity is the same. It will take trillions of dollars to move all cars to electricity. Realistically, it won’t happen. There are too many pitfalls and challenges in the way. The most likely outcome is that we stop pushing BEVs so hard and move in another direction.

        • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Because Toyota spent something like 15 31 years developing a shitty performing, very expensive hydrogen car that they then sold hardly any units of and there are still no filling stations to fill them.

          If you think battery electric cars are expensive, how about spending $75,000 on basically a Toyota Corolla? Sure you can drive 600 mi on one tank but…

          To say that Toyota fucked up is an understatement.

          • DauntingFlamingo
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Toyota is one of the largest auto makers in the history of the world. They’re practically their own government, and have more than enough money bankroll a burgeoning technology tree. To say they fucked up by testing a brand new technology and developing it in-house, seemingly on their own until recently (BMW and Mercedes have both joined Toyota in their development process within the last 5 years) is bonkers.

            Any new technology or idea generally has a long road to maturity. You wouldn’t say the quest for quantum computing or the unified field theory are complete wastes of time and money when we’re discovering things along the way. Hydrogen may not work out for your consumer vehicle, but it absolutely works better than electric for those trans-oceanic container ships and shooting rockets to the moon.

    • Lmaydev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Unfortunately capitalism will keep killing things that are good for the environment while we spend 7 trillion subsidizing fossil fuels.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Hydrogen really isn’t good for the environment. You have to spend electricity to make it, then storing it is a massive issue just to turn it back into electricity. There’s some advantage to it with very large and heavy vehicles, but not for cars. Batteries make a lot more sense for cars, and you can charge them almost anywhere (theoretically). I can see shipping and maybe trucking moving towards hydrogen at some point, especially since shipping in particular is an extremely convenient location to produce hydrogen.

        • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          I wish more people understood this. We aren’t going to find a one size fits all replacement for oil. It’s going to be using all the different renewable sources in different applications where they excel.

          • serratur@lemmy.wtf
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            It’s because people dont understand that hydrogen is a energy carrier and if we want to produce it in e green way it is more comparable to batteries than petroleum.

        • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Agreed. We’re going to see hydrogen being used in industrial scaled uses in the future more than transportation.

          However, I just watched the video a few days ago about the Canadian mining company that is switching all of their mining equipment to battery electric. I thought that was pretty interesting - The mine operator flatly said that hydrogen wasn’t financially viable.

          So I’m thinking hydrogen being used for steel manufacturing, chemical manufacturing and other major large scale materials processing.

          • Hypx@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            We’re going to use hydrogen for all things transportation. It’s pretty much the obvious next step since we still need chemical fuels. There is just too much BEV propaganda and peopled totally deluded about how transportation works.

        • Lmaydev@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Haha someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning.

          So you think 9 trillion couldn’t be spent better than fossil fuel subsidies?

          • Agent641@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            10 months ago

            Li-ion batteries explode.

            LiFePO4 batteries can’t explode without the aid of some C-4. Im so tired of my boi LiFePO4 being lumped in with their explodey cousins.

            • PeterPoopshit@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              I like lifepo4 batteries. You can safely forget about them and then they don’t burn your house down. They last long enough that when you finally do remember and need them for something years later, they’re probably still good.

          • 𝒍𝒆𝒎𝒂𝒏𝒏@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Both make lovely sources of power for cars and lawnmowers though 😍 just don’t inhale the exhaust of the former, or the combustion of the latter 😳

        • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          This image, right or wrong, is why hydrogen cars were never going to win. The public gestalt on how they thought of them mimics this photo.

        • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          The reason why the Hindenburg exploded like that was because they coated the fucking thing in what is essentially thermite. They doped those things with aluminum powder mixed with nitrate.

    • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      Ironically hydrogen works well as a storage solution for the variability of wind and solar. When you have a large excess of them, you can run electrolyzers to generate green hydrogen. And then when the grid needs some more supply, we can use that hydrogen to make up the gap.

      • Hypx@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Which is basically the same problem with green transportation: A car is usually lightly used, but every once in a while you drive hundreds of miles. That requires a high capacity energy storage mechanism where “efficiency” is not that big of a concern. But that creates the need for hydrogen cars. At best, you can conceive of a plug-in hybrid car where short trips are battery powered. But then you have redundant infrastructure, and it is simpler to just to move everyone to hydrogen.

        • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          I will also say that transport and storage of hydrogen is way better than what people are envisioning here. Full disclosure, I work for a hydrogen energy company, so I am biased, but I also have seen things in this space work well

  • Brickhead92@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    10 months ago

    The same will happen to EVs after them libs still all the electricity with their solar panels. /s

  • drudoo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    10 months ago

    Weird that this hasn’t been on the local news. I see Drivr cars all the time.

  • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    10 months ago

    Relevant bits:

    “According to the Danish Car Importers association, there were 147 fuel-cell cars on Danish roads at the end of last year, with only one sold so far this year — all of which now have no means to refuel.”

    “He added: “There is no doubt that hydrogen cars are not an option in the short term and that electric cars will win the vast majority of the passenger car market.”

    • Hypx@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Hydrogen is guaranteed to win this one. Batteries are just another unsustainable greenwashing idea. People are falling prey to BEV propaganda.