Hypx @ Hypx @kbin.social

Posts

24

Comments

401

Joined

2 yr. ago

We're slowing turning smartphones into dumbphones again. Many of us used to rock 10+ year old phones, since phone calls and texting doesn't need anything fancy.

There's zero chance he's a broke Republican.

There will come a day when people will realize that even tech companies aren't worth that much.

What type of EV? Because people have a habit of conflating the battery powered EV with EVs in general.

And yet, being carbon-free, makes it worthwhile.

That "SINGLE upside" is the difference maker. What other criteria is more important?

I suspect there is something more to this than just that. After all, the car in question did this:

Earlier this month, a Cruise robotaxi notably ran over a pedestrian who had been hit by another vehicle driven by a human. The pedestrian became pinned under a tire of the Cruise vehicle after it came to a stop — and then was pulled for about 20 feet (six meters) as the car attempted to move off the road.

It seems like there are unsolvable safety problems going on.

Hydrogen cars already exist. It's pretty obvious that these problems are solved. Guys like you are basically denying reality.

You repeated the exact argument people used against solar panels. In reality, it's nonsense and it's trapped in a fossil fuel powered world. BEVs only make sense if fossil fuels powered everything. Once renewables catch on, it is the battery that stops making sense.

You're just being duped by the battery industry. BEVs are the real dead-end. A hydrogen car is a vastly smarter idea. A car isn't a smartphone and you don't want it to work the same way. In reality, you want something that replicates the usage scenario of conventional cars. Trying to "reinvent the wheel" with BEVs is just making this worse.

Not to mention how much of the argument against FCEVs are either temporary or not real at all. BEV companies want you think that there's only one solution. In reality, their solution is going obsolete.

You’re comparing liquid methane with compressed hydrogen. Not the same thing.

Like I just said, you’re using Gish Gallop. It’s just a pile of BS or half-truths. It’s not really an argument.

In reality, the problem of dealing with hydrogen is basically solved. It is similar to where solar power was a decade ago. The goal right now is to scale it all up. There are no other real issues left.

Green hydrogen is made from water. The resources needed are tiny compared to the battery equivalent. You've pretty much inverted reality here.

A hydrogen station is not a gas station either. The only difference is that you don't need an entire separate set of charging points in parking lots, garages, etc. In reality, this is the cheaper and more practical solution. It solves the problem for everyone and not just a minority of drivers.

Then how do you travel long distances? You still need some kind of public charging station, which basically recreates the gas station experience.

The solution just to power everything with hydrogen. It solves all use cases with a single solution. And it also replaces the need to have giant mining and manufacturing industries for the batteries. It is the fundamentally better solution.

A hydrogen molecule is larger than helium, mainly since helium is a noble gas and hydrogen is diatomic.

A lot of the criticism of hydrogen is just pseudo-scientific BS, mostly coming from BEV fans. It's basically a form of Gish Gallop. People need to realize that hydrogen is a totally ordinary gas with solvable problems.

A big chunk of the green movement is totally complicit with this type of behavior. For many of them, it is just about fundraising, not serious action against climate change.

Hydrogen works basically the same as natural gas. The problems of handling it are readily solvable.

Millions of people will never have the option to charge at home. The problem with BEVs is that you need tens of millions if not hundreds of millions of charging stations. That is really expensive and likely unfeasible.

Hydrogen stations will basically replace gas stations, sometimes on the very same piece of property. That makes a replacement infrastructure very straightforward to deploy. It makes more sense than having charging stations everywhere. People are just angry that their favored idea isn't working out, so they attack this idea.

For starters, ICE cars have not been banned nearly anywhere. For seconds, hydrogen is not unworkable. That is pure BEV propaganda.

The future will almost certainly be hydrogen cars. They are also EVs BTW. BEV fanatics are just bullshitting about this fact here. In reality, BEVs are not a sustainable idea and are doomed.

Battery cell technology will change over time. Into fuel cells.

Battery electric cars predate internal combustion. It is emphatically not the way to go. In fact, it is just a fad driven by subsidies and desire to appear green. It will die off once the subsidies go away and people realize that paying vastly more for an inferior type of car is not a smart decision.