5 ms·
Depends on how you view density. Energy per unit mass - better than hydrocarbons. Energy per unit volume - worse.
by unchocked 7y ago
Depends on how you view density. Energy per unit mass - better than hydrocarbons. Energy per unit volume - worse.
- masklinn 7y agoThey're technically wrong as energy density is per volume, "specific energy" or "massic energy" is per mass. Also while the specific energy of hydrogen is good, you have to account for the weight of the container. You can store fuel in a bucket, not so hydrogen.
- darksaints 7y agoCompressed hydrogen containers are pretty heavy and that's a bummer, but they're still better than lithium ion by an order of magnitude.
- darksaints 7y agoCompressed hydrogen at 700 bar is 2x better volumetric energy density than the best lithium ion batteries on the market today. It's a 4-5x worse than hydrocarbons, but still workable.
- nimish 7y ago2x better than a technology that benefits from the enormous, monstrous economies of scale that lithium ion batteries do is a folly. Every portable electronic device benefits from lithium ion improvements. That's how Tesla was able to launch: use the commodity 18650s from laptops as a relatively low cost cell. There's a fundamentally better argument to shifting everyone to hybrids (extreme bang for buck for CO2 emission reduction) than FCEVs.
- darksaints 7y agoI think for most electric vehicles, batteries are good enough, and probably the better choice. But if you're going hybrid for the extra range, fuel cell technology is basically already there and makes a great range extender.