4 ms·
No, hydrogen isn't a much safer bet, all Hindenburg jokes aside. Quite the contrary, I think hydrogen already has lost out in the car space and might even so in
by _ph_ 5y ago
No, hydrogen isn't a much safer bet, all Hindenburg jokes aside. Quite the contrary, I think hydrogen already has lost out in the car space and might even so in the truck space.
Battery costs are still falling a lot. With the changes outlined at the Tesla battery day, production costs for battery electric vehicles might be cheaper than combustion engined cars. If you compare a Tesla with a BMW, the Tesla already might be cheaper, it certainly is if you consider the TCO.
Meanwhile, hydrogen cars are much more expensive than battery electric cars, there are only a few models available at all and there are few filling stations - they are really expensive to build. On top of that, distribution of the hydrogen is much more complex than using the power grid for electricity. And you can charge an electric car at basically any outlet, if need requires.
But the largest problem is, that for renewable hydrogen, we need about 3x as much as electricity than using a battery electric vehicle. Not counting anything else, this is 3x the cost.
- cogman10 5y agoBecause of the distribution problem, my assumption is that hydrogen will be confined to easy to distribute transportation if at all. That's shipping, airlines, maybe trains (though trains really should be made electric)
- sumtechguy 5y ago> If you compare a Tesla with a BMW, the Tesla already might be cheaper, it certainly is if you consider the TCO Having owned a few BMW's I do not doubt that assertion at all. Hydrogen has a storage problem. As in the stuff is wickedly hard to keep from 'evaporating'. Electric has a charge time/range problem. I can fill an ICE car in 10 mins and drive 400 miles. The same thing with electric takes an hour. For 'day to day' use electric is like almost there (up front cost being one of the bigger issues). For long range drivers, not yet.