3 ms·

Something that I think needs to be considered more is the now dominant thought that Electric Vehicles = Lithium BEVs. We should not be putting all eggs in that

Something that I think needs to be considered more is the now dominant thought that Electric Vehicles = Lithium BEVs. We should not be putting all eggs in that one basket. Obviously they are the most widely developed, and hydrogen fuel cell technology isn't anywhere near the point where it is ready. But we shouldn't stop developing it. Then there's the fascinating "aluminium air" battery [0] concept which could work so well for people away from traditional infrastructure, or even in small city cars where you can't easily charge at the side of the road in a parking bay. I want to see a future where there are 10s of different types of electric and zero carbon vehicles on the roads. Each tailored to a different market and vehicle type. 0: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium–air_battery https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium–air_battery

rootusrootus 4y ago
> hydrogen fuel cell technology isn't anywhere near the point where it is ready. But we shouldn't stop developing it. Scientific development on the technology should continue, but the focus on FCEVs as a use case is misplaced. The idea has been worked on for decades, but we're just about as far away from practical hydrogen infrastructure as we've ever been. It's still only available in any meaningful way in two metro areas in California. There are far more practical solutions to fast EV fueling than hydrogen.
- hcurtiss 4y ago
  Is that true? The Tesla semi presentation cracked me up with the huge container of batteries prepared to charge a single semi. The grid load for charging any meaningful number of EVs simultaneously is hilariously out of reach (even if we could build the generation capacity, NIMBY-Americans will never accomodate the transmission). It seems to me that hydrogen is a relatively elegant solution to this problem. We are good at transporting and storing compressed gases today. It seems to me that building out that infrastructure is more likely than the gigantic power delivery infrastructure necessary to charge lithium batteries.
JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> the now dominant thought that Electric Vehicles = Lithium BEVs In popular media, perhaps. Research, including industrial R&D, continued on other fronts. That said, the periodic table seems to limit us to hydrogen, lithium, sodium and perhaps potassium. Life chose hydrogen (with carbon). We’re transitioning from hydrocarbons to lithium (with carbon; some are trying silicon). Sodium is close to being a viable contender, but it’s heavier than lithium, which barring a chemistry breakthrough will relegate it below lithium.
jstummbillig 4y ago
I don't think anyone is stopping anything, really. It's just functions doing work: If one thing get's easier and cheaper and safer and is building a track record, all at the same time and without signs of stopping or running into any obvious issues, we are increasingly less incentivized to think up alternatives. I don't think that's unreasonable. In the end, the issue is mostly a very, very small number of people in all of existence, who are capable of meaningfully developing new technologies (and always at the cost of not advancing something else, because they would all be capable of working on something else). We have been good about increasing the number of capable people, so it will not be one or the other, but even so, right now, it's harder to imagine a world with an abundance of top engineers making new technologies actually possible, than it is to imagine new techologies.

rootusrootus 4y ago

> hydrogen fuel cell technology isn't anywhere near the point where it is ready. But we shouldn't stop developing it. Scientific development on the technology should continue, but the focus on FCEVs as a use case is misplaced. The idea has been worked on for decades, but we're just about as far away from practical hydrogen infrastructure as we've ever been. It's still only available in any meaningful way in two metro areas in California. There are far more practical solutions to fast EV fueling than hydrogen.

hcurtiss 4y ago
Is that true? The Tesla semi presentation cracked me up with the huge container of batteries prepared to charge a single semi. The grid load for charging any meaningful number of EVs simultaneously is hilariously out of reach (even if we could build the generation capacity, NIMBY-Americans will never accomodate the transmission). It seems to me that hydrogen is a relatively elegant solution to this problem. We are good at transporting and storing compressed gases today. It seems to me that building out that infrastructure is more likely than the gigantic power delivery infrastructure necessary to charge lithium batteries.

JumpCrisscross 4y ago

> the now dominant thought that Electric Vehicles = Lithium BEVs In popular media, perhaps. Research, including industrial R&D, continued on other fronts. That said, the periodic table seems to limit us to hydrogen, lithium, sodium and perhaps potassium. Life chose hydrogen (with carbon). We’re transitioning from hydrocarbons to lithium (with carbon; some are trying silicon). Sodium is close to being a viable contender, but it’s heavier than lithium, which barring a chemistry breakthrough will relegate it below lithium.

jstummbillig 4y ago

I don't think anyone is stopping anything, really. It's just functions doing work: If one thing get's easier and cheaper and safer and is building a track record, all at the same time and without signs of stopping or running into any obvious issues, we are increasingly less incentivized to think up alternatives. I don't think that's unreasonable. In the end, the issue is mostly a very, very small number of people in all of existence, who are capable of meaningfully developing new technologies (and always at the cost of not advancing something else, because they would all be capable of working on something else). We have been good about increasing the number of capable people, so it will not be one or the other, but even so, right now, it's harder to imagine a world with an abundance of top engineers making new technologies actually possible, than it is to imagine new techologies.