3 ms·

There are a couple replies about why Tesla doesn't still do battery swaps, but none of them got it right: Back when Tesla demoed the battery swap capability, C

There are a couple replies about why Tesla doesn't still do battery swaps, but none of them got it right: Back when Tesla demoed the battery swap capability, California's CARB was offering extra ZEV credits for each electric vehicle sold with "fast refueling" capability. Tesla set up the single "battery swap station" in order to comply with the letter of the law and collect a few extra tens of millions in credits. That one station they opened was right across the street from a free Supercharger station, had no capability for automated battery swaps, and was available by invitation only. As soon as Tesla collected its extra ZEV credits and the qualifications changed, the station was abandoned.

jiggawatts 5y ago
This is the same type of thing as the "green" hydrogen-based initiatives. Literally 100% of these are run by fossil-fuel companies that want to get various incentives and credits for green initiatives. Hydrogen is hilariously bad at everything, and makes zero sense to use for any purpose. Yet, it keeps getting pushed and pushed because of these legal fictions.
- adgjlsfhk1 5y ago
  For cars I definitely agree. I think hydrogen might be used for planes in the future. The future for them isn't going to be electric, so if we want 0 emission planes, there isn't really a viable alternative.
  - jiggawatts 5y ago
    Storage may be troublesome for planes. The high-pressure tanks are heavy, and the low-pressure storage tanks are even more heavy. Aircraft fuel tanks are just empty unused spaces in the wings and the like, they're practically free in terms of weight. Also, jet fuel has a nice balance energy per unit weight and energy per unit volume. Hydrogen is too skewed, it is the lightest fuel but takes a huge volume. For planes, it would make more sense to synthesise jet fuel from atmospheric CO2, or CO2 captured from industrial exhaust.

jiggawatts 5y ago

This is the same type of thing as the "green" hydrogen-based initiatives. Literally 100% of these are run by fossil-fuel companies that want to get various incentives and credits for green initiatives. Hydrogen is hilariously bad at everything, and makes zero sense to use for any purpose. Yet, it keeps getting pushed and pushed because of these legal fictions.

adgjlsfhk1 5y ago
For cars I definitely agree. I think hydrogen might be used for planes in the future. The future for them isn't going to be electric, so if we want 0 emission planes, there isn't really a viable alternative.
- jiggawatts 5y ago
  Storage may be troublesome for planes. The high-pressure tanks are heavy, and the low-pressure storage tanks are even more heavy. Aircraft fuel tanks are just empty unused spaces in the wings and the like, they're practically free in terms of weight. Also, jet fuel has a nice balance energy per unit weight and energy per unit volume. Hydrogen is too skewed, it is the lightest fuel but takes a huge volume. For planes, it would make more sense to synthesise jet fuel from atmospheric CO2, or CO2 captured from industrial exhaust.