Skip Navigation

Posts
24
Comments
401
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Hydrogen cars are EVs. The lithium-ion EV is the doomed technology, propped up by hype and subsidies.

  • Everyone intimately involved with that program needs to go to jail. It has killed multiple people already and it never worked as advertised.

  • People move to Florida for the same reason why people use to move to California. So you wonder when housing prices will absolutely soar. Also, lack of natural disaster preparedness is something that can't be ignored in Florida. Deregulation won't solve that problem.

  • It's still something pretty close to a government mandated monopoly. Hell, most Tesla fanboys want literally just Tesla owning the entire car industry. And the Chinese car companies are all being controlled by the Chinese government. It's closer to being one company than you think.

  • You are just listening to too much anti-hydrogen propaganda. It's absurd to say that it isn't getting cheaper. It is just doing the same thing wind and solar did as they scaled up. The infrastructure is rapidly expanding too, something you'd know if you actually started to look into hydrogen.

  • Then you may prefer something like oligopoly. The goal is to have just a few companies that only make one type of car with no other options. Cost of transportation will go much higher. The conclusion is still the same: very little or no consumer choices.

  • In the short-term, all types of cars will exist including PHEVs. It is the BEV fanatic that is trying to eliminate all alternatives.

  • They are aiming to ban all alternatives, or create subsidies in such way that only one idea can exist. That is consistently with a monopoly.

  • Solar got cheap and then it became widespread. You are witnessing the same thing happen with hydrogen now.

  • People here are actively rejecting the possibility of an alternative type of EV. For most of them, only the BEV can exist, and anything is reflexively rejected. It's not the first time they behave like that, so don't think they are coming from nowhere and are just asking questions. It's purely an act of defensiveness, likely to defend their car purposes or their investments.

  • That's revisionist history. Wind and solar were widely condemned as being inferior technology in the past. They are in many ways worse than hydropower, their main zero emission competitor of the time.

    Your repeating some old anti-hydrogen story probably from either an oil company or a battery company. An FCEV gets around 70 MPGe. There is very little argument that it is somehow less green than existing petrol cars. It's an obvious repeat of classic anti-green rhetoric. We heard everything from solar panels or hybrids being demonized as being worse than the conventional solution by random fossil fuel marketing firms. It's all bunk.

    And no to that last claim either. There's a good reason to believe that an FCEV is greener than a BEV. For starters, it has much less upfront emissions during production. And at something like 30% green hydrogen, the BEV will never catch up to the FCEV, even if it is running on 100% green electricity.

  • Actually no. You actually need a chemical fuel in a lot of cases.

    A hydrogen car is basically an EV but with a vastly more energy dense battery. Hence why it is a better idea than a BEV.

  • And so is most electricity. The point is that it can be made from water. You're just repeating an argument used against all EVs.

    Not only do I know more than pretty much anyone here, I can immediately recognize all of the dumb myths and PR talking points everyone brings up. This is old news for me.

    Everyone who oppose hydrogen pretty much has an agenda. If not an owner of a BEV, they are an investor of some kind.
    Ultimately, why would anyone oppose green energy or green technology? Nevermind anyone who calls himself an environmentalist. It's the most absurd fact in all of this. So many people here are lying to themselves about what they really believe and what their real motivations are.

  • Seriously, fuck off. You're just a sad troll.

  • By itself, no. But you can power basically anything with hydrogen. Pretty much all of industry will switch to hydrogen. Same is true of most of transportation. It's just the BEV fanatic crowd that suddenly has an issue with passenger cars also being powered by hydrogen. In reality, it is a big revolution across many sectors. That will in fact solve climate change or at least greatly reduce the problem.

  • BEVs predate internal combustion engines. People have waited a long time for it to happen. Hydrogen has the same benefit as batteries, just minus any mining to begin with.

    BEVs are the result of huge subsidies. They are not really in demand by most people. A lot of this debate is within a cluster of out-of-touch rich people.

  • Hydrogen pipeline are cheaper than wires and they don't leak either. You are just repeating marketing BS from competing industries. Hydrogen molecules aren't even the smallest. Helium is the smallest since it is a nobel gas and not a diatom.

    Pipelines are made of steel. They are much cheaper than copper wires. In reality, your idea is much more expensive from an infrastructure point of view.

  • FCEVs are nearly PHEVs already. Battery powered for (very) short ranges and hydrogen for longer range. A PHEV version is just one with a bigger battery.

    The current price of green hydrogen is already cheap enough to justify itself as a fuel. It is just distribution that is the issue.

    It will be much cheaper to move hydrogen around than electricity. Pipelines are cheaper than wires after all. The cost of upgrade the grid and putting a charging point everywhere will be in the trillions of dollars. Many times more expensive than what it would take to have hydrogen stations replace gas stations.

    The BEV over FCEV argument, as a near-term solution, is quickly running out of steam. It is similar to when several car companies were stuck promoting diesel cars just when the BEV began showing up. It will be the same story. People are desperately asking for an EV that can be a one-to-one replacement for their current car. As a result, the arrival of FCEVs will happen sooner than what many expect.

  • Your own post was garbled as well.

    Plug-in fuel cell cars are a viable idea and solve a lot of problems. You are just fearmongering.

    FCEVs are again, just EVs. Just without the huge cost of batteries. That ensures they will be the cheapest solution out there. Your rhetoric against the cost of green hydrogen is just a repeat of anti-renewable energy rhetoric of the past.

    The difference is that you are basically saying FCEVs cannot exist in meaningful numbers. That's an absurdity. It's pretty much undeniable that they will play a major role given the need for green technology. To deny this is to repeat a common climate change denier argument. It is an argument against green technology altogether.

  • Those other BEVs are just other car companies chasing the subsidies. Once you get over Musk's lies, you'll realize that the market is not an organic one. It is just an artificial market created by the government. Most people don't want a BEV.