Father; husband; mechanical engineer. Posting from my self-hosted Lemmy instance here in beautiful New Jersey. I also post from my Pixelfed instance.
Think about it. What are you supposed to do while you’re stuck charging for however long it takes? Scroll ads? Go spend money at a nearby business, hoping that you can get in and out before you get dinged for occupying the charging station for too long? Apparently, some charging stations even take reservations like Dorsia. No thanks!
That is a possibility but they have already corrupted hydrogen. Between the two, I will go with the one that can go either way. There’s also the fact that EVs are being produced now while hydrogen car production is still a way off, so it’s a stall tactic as well
How is the battery industry not corrupted? How does hydrogen production not go “either way”? I’m aware that lots of subsidies have already gone to BEVs, but it’s giving in to the sunk cost fallacy if that’s the reason to abandon hydrogen.
They can also be set up anywhere and are much more convenient, I’ve seen quite a few in residential streets, companies can set them up in their parking lots, etc.
That’s crazy to me. BEVs are so slow to refuel that we’re going to need many more “fast” charging stations and they’ll need to be put everywhere. A 20 minute charge time, or whatever it is, is not convenient. That’s especially so if you need to park longer than that, effectively putting that charging station out of service for someone else. Maybe someone will figure out battery swapping, but then every swap station will need extra space to safely warehouse the batteries while they charge. A hydrogen station doesn’t need to store hydrogen on site, but even if it does at least it’s not a potential environmental contamination hazard. Pushing BEVs beyond the use case of slow overnight or workday charging is a mistake.
There is no clean, cheap, efficient source of hydrogen. You still need to transport it around burning more fuel to transport it all around.
That’s just not true. Electrolysis of water to produce hydrogen can be accomplished with electricity from any source and it even makes intermittent renewable sources feasible without massive, enviromentally unfriendly batteries or fossil fuel fired peaking plants. It is even possible to get hydrogen from natural gas by way of pyrolysis, which avoids CO2 emissions. Hydrogen can of course be safely and efficiently transported by pipeline, probably significantly more safely than overhead power transmission lines can “transport” electricity.
There are already multiple ways to get clean electricity for BEVs and the supply chain is cleaner… Plant, grid, sometimes a grid storage battery, battery, car.
Fixed it for you. All these batteries are going to be a problem. Meanwhile, hydrogen just requires pressure vessels and pipelines for storage and transport, which are much safer for the environment.
Also coal is already a TINY TINY % of US power production, https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/us-energy-facts/ …
As we have seen in Germany, the permanent reduction of coal fired electricity is not a sure thing. Regardless, the point is that whether you are driving a BEV or an FCEV, it will be running on an overall energy mix that is determined by separate national policies.
You do not have to hand it to Elon Musk. If home charging is the big benefit of BEVs, then why do “fast” charging stations have to get built everywhere? Tesla et al are just enshittifying refueling!
Shift? Dude that article has been debunked already.
A month after the Business Journal article, a Harris Ranch spokesperson confirmed that Tesla did set up diesel generators to power Superchargers for a time. So, it’s a thing that happens. Regardless, the point is that the energy in the gasoline and diesel fuel that goes into most of the fleet will still have to come from somewhere and there are no policies to make sure it comes from GHG-free sources.
Funny thing is that EVs are still cleaner than ICE even when powered by a Coal grid
If it’s not a problem for BEVs to run on electricity derived from coal, then it shouldn’t be a problem for FCEVs to run on hydrogen derived from natural gas. What I’m saying is that it doesn’t really matter how the energy from coal or natural gas eventually gets consumed. It’s a separate issue that we simply shouldn’t be burning any of that stuff.
Most of the hydrogen on market is made with methane.
EVs use whatever source is being given, and most of these sources are converting to renewables.
Not comparable imo.
As I explained in this reply, you can’t count on the grid’s energy mix improving or not getting worse as the vehicle fleet transitions to BEV. What you identify as a problem with FCEVs is really just bad energy policy that BEVs don’t solve either.
I actually kind of agree with you that the ideal BEV requires barely any new infrastructure. It should have a small battery that can support a daily commute and errands with slow charging at home overnight or during the day at work. Yet somehow these “fast” charging stations, which aren’t as fast or convenient as regular gas stations (and still run at least partially on fossil fuels anyway), have to get built everywhere. If we can’t get rid of these stations then let them be hydrogen stations.
As the transportation sector electrifies, how can you be so sure that the GHG-free portion of the grid’s electricity mix will stay the same or improve? Why wouldn’t the fossil fuels that currently power our vehicle fleet follow the demand and shift to powering the grid? BEVs only make a small portion of the cars on the road, but there’s evidence that this shift is already happening. So, while it might currently be the case that the hydrogen powering an FCEV was derived from natural gas, it’s also certainly possible that your BEV is effectively running on coal. I’m not trying to knock BEVs here. Rather, I’m making the point that the problem you’ve raised is one of energy policy, not FCEVs. Relying on BEVs to mitigate our current energy policy, instead of correcting the policy, is just going to create new problems.
As for recycling battery packs, yes, I’m aware that it’s a thing, but it’s not pretty. The best course is to minimize the amount of battery that needs to be dealt with in the first place.
The LED ‘U’ shaped accent light in the passenger side headlamp assembly of my 2017 Golf went out a few years ago, causing an error that disabled the headlight turning feature. It is not repairable so I had to get a new assembly. Fortunately, it happened right before my warranty finished and was covered.
Unfortunately, I think the other manufacturers are also following Tesla’s model of oversized batteries and software gimmicks.
That’s fair, but Musk has specifically complained about FCEVs before.
I don’t think transitioning to either predominantly BEVs or hydrogen powered vehicles really affects the energy mix since the electricity to charge BEVs also comes from natural gas. That said, the infrastructure to support fast charging for a predominantly BEV fleet isn’t there either, especially for cargo trucks.
I don’t know how the mineral ingredients of a fuel cell stack compare to a lithium battery, but assuming they’re the same, a fuel cell vehicle has significantly less of them. For example, the fuel cell stack in the Toyota Mirai weighs about 19kg and is complemented with a battery that weighs 45kg (1, 2). In comparison, the Tesla Model 3 carries a battery weighing 480kg. Therefore, a BEV has about 6.5x as much stuff of questionable origin (and questionable disposal requirements) as a FCEV.
We need hydrogen powered vehicles just to spite this guy, if nothing else.
I don’t know if they were the first, but they’re one of the most notorious offenders.
I have observed that myself with the infotainment system of my 2017 Golf Alltrack, but when did they start software derating their engines? My understanding is that there’s nothing much to be gained from an aftermarket ECU tune unless I switch to premium gas and the more powerful Golf models have other real differences like bigger turbochargers.
How messed up are things in the UK if that’s something that makes you feel proud?
The businesses are launching a joint venture to develop platforms for “software-defined vehicles.”
Big oof.
Cross posting good.
We should be going full nuclear regardless in order to mitigate climate change.