5 ms·

You're not wrong, but I do feel you're being rather pedantic; it's quite clear what was meant, and hydrogen for general public cars is a pipe dream.

Swizec 4y ago
> it's quite clear what was meant, Laws are generally followed by the letter, not by intention. Whole cottage industries exist that look for ways around laws without breaking them. What is written down matters even if what was intended differs.
- kwhitefoot 4y ago
  In most European jurisdictions the spirit of the law counts for quite a lot, especially when you get to higher courts.
sandworm101 4y ago
Most think that way, but I'm not going to tell Toyota how to build cars. If they think it feasible I say let them try, https://www.motor1.com/news/535002/next-toyota-prius-hydrogen-2025/ https://www.motor1.com/news/535002/next-toyota-prius-hydroge...
- onethought 4y ago
  But no one has proved our green hydrogen at car scale yet. So right now hydrogen is fossil fuel (because it’s extracted from methane)
- kwhitefoot 4y ago
  They've been trying for years. No sign of them being worthwhile yet.
  - cassianoleal 4y ago
    That's cool but there have been attempts to build EVs at least as far back as the late 60s [0]. [0] https://autoesporte.globo.com/um-so-planeta/noticia/2021/04/gurgel-itaipu-foi-o-primeiro-carro-eletrico-nacional-mas-morreu-por-problemas-que-existem-ate-hoje.ghtml https://autoesporte.globo.com/um-so-planeta/noticia/2021/04/...
    - majewsky 4y ago
      Yes, exactly, and now we have them at mass market scale, whereas hydrogen is not at the same scale by a large margin. I don't think your argument goes in the direction you want it to go.
      - cassianoleal 4y ago
        I think it does. It took 50-60 years to get EVs where they are today. Why abort all efforts for hydrogen now? It could take 50, 60 or 200 years. It will only happen if they're allowed to keep developing it though.
        sandworm101 4y ago
        Longer than that. The first electric cars were over a century ago. Battery tech is even older than that, maybe another century. It took many lifetimes for the tech to get to where it is today.
  - WithinReason 4y ago
    But why ban hydrogen fuelled cars?
    - bryanlarsen 4y ago
      Virtually all hydrogen fuelled vehicles use fuel cells, so do not use combustion engines, so wouldn't be banned.
      - sandworm101 4y ago
        Yet.
- KennyBlanken 4y ago
  Toyota is infamous for their resistance to BEVs and their insistence on sticking with cars that have ICEs. They've gone so far as to distribute corporate propaganda to grade schoolers that "teaches" them that BEVs are evil and hybrids are "better." It's for several reasons, interwoven. One, Toyota lagged behind everyone else. VW and GM, the other giants, are far ahead of them. Even Nissan, the shittiest manufacturer in Japan, is far ahead of them. Took them a bit (the Leaf was a joke until its most recent incarnation because of Nissan's cost-cutting, refusing to implement proper, liquid-based thermal management.) Toyota, and the Japanese economy, are heavily dependent upon the Japanese replacing their cars every few years, which is why they obsessively re-style their products with little changes "under the hood." For something like decades the Corolla by and large did not change much except for body panels and interior changes. Another reason people replace their cars is the unreliability as they exit the warranty period. BEVs are much more reliable, so people won't replace them as often. Japan's economy is heavily dependent upon a huge cottage industry of mom and pop car part suppliers, and BEVs are both vastly simpler and much more reliable, meaning there will be far less demand for parts during manufacture, in warranty, and post-warranty sales. Japan's economy is also heavily dependent upon people replacing their cars often, as previously mentioned, to keep fueling the whole industry. Further, they export a huge number of used vehicles, mostly to the rest of Asia - and there's a very large industry around that. Transporting the cars, evaluating their condition, auctioning them, shipping them. If people keep their cars longer, that all grinds to a halt...particularly because the cars often go to countries where frankly there's little hope of there being EV infrastructure any time soon. So as used EVs enter Japan's used car export economy, nobody will want them. Because nobody will want them, auction buyers won't buy them. So dealers won't be able to get much money for the cars. Which means they won't be able to offer good trade-in values. Which means people won't be able to afford buying a Toyota Camry with differently shaped headlights and bumpers every 3 years. Which means the Japanese economy, frankly, grinds to a halt. Further: Dealers make all their money on maintenance and service, especially out-of-warranty. BEVs require far less maintenance and service. So dealers are pissed about the huge drop in income from these BEVs. So keeping ICEs means dealers keep getting maintenance and service on the engines. By the way: another reason Toyota changes the headlights/taillights bumpers so often? They're the most commonly damaged in a collision, and by changing them constantly (and assuring that only one or two model years will fit a car...saaaaay, by making them stretch deep into other body panels like the front fenders with long bits that, oh by the way, happen to be pretty fragile!), they get to keep the parts expensive, and aftermarket suppliers (and the used car parts industry) have a nearly impossible time keeping up. Further by-the-way: some cars, it's incredibly difficult to change the headlight bulb. Guess why? That's right: helping dealers inflate the labor costs for a bulb change. 15 minutes at $120/hour isn't sexy. But if you have to take apart a dozen things in the engine compartment? Why, now you can justify an hour's labor!...and because your techs are probably paid for the "book time", they figure out how to do it a lot faster....and both the dealership and tech make out like bandits, while the customer gets fucked for the full book time labor charge.
kybernetyk 4y ago
hydrogen isn't the only option. co2 neutral synthetic fuels (ones which have been manufactured in a way that burning them would create 0 net co2 emissions) would be a great alternative to enslaving 3rd world kids to dig up all the lithium needed so software engineers in the west can drive EVs and feel better about themselves.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
numbers_guy 4y ago
If hydrogen for cars is a pipedream then aviation will never be green, because that is the only viable option we have. If we manage to greenify aviation, then there's nothing saying we cannot go one step further and start driving hydrogen fueled cars.
- lennixm 4y ago
  Hydrogen is a pipe dream because it's both a worse user experience and less efficient than EVs. If we could we would electrify planes too but the unfortunately the energy density of electric battery is way too small for large planes meaning we have to use hydrogen (or SAFs) out of necessity.
000ooo000 4y ago
If there's a place in the world for pedants, it's in addressing clickbait or manipulative headlines. Someone's gotta call these garbage journalists out.

Swizec 4y ago

> it's quite clear what was meant, Laws are generally followed by the letter, not by intention. Whole cottage industries exist that look for ways around laws without breaking them. What is written down matters even if what was intended differs.

kwhitefoot 4y ago
In most European jurisdictions the spirit of the law counts for quite a lot, especially when you get to higher courts.

sandworm101 4y ago

Most think that way, but I'm not going to tell Toyota how to build cars. If they think it feasible I say let them try, https://www.motor1.com/news/535002/next-toyota-prius-hydrogen-2025/ https://www.motor1.com/news/535002/next-toyota-prius-hydroge...

onethought 4y ago
But no one has proved our green hydrogen at car scale yet. So right now hydrogen is fossil fuel (because it’s extracted from methane)
kwhitefoot 4y ago
They've been trying for years. No sign of them being worthwhile yet.
- cassianoleal 4y ago
  That's cool but there have been attempts to build EVs at least as far back as the late 60s [0]. [0] https://autoesporte.globo.com/um-so-planeta/noticia/2021/04/gurgel-itaipu-foi-o-primeiro-carro-eletrico-nacional-mas-morreu-por-problemas-que-existem-ate-hoje.ghtml https://autoesporte.globo.com/um-so-planeta/noticia/2021/04/...
  - majewsky 4y ago
    Yes, exactly, and now we have them at mass market scale, whereas hydrogen is not at the same scale by a large margin. I don't think your argument goes in the direction you want it to go.
    - cassianoleal 4y ago
      I think it does. It took 50-60 years to get EVs where they are today. Why abort all efforts for hydrogen now? It could take 50, 60 or 200 years. It will only happen if they're allowed to keep developing it though.
      - sandworm101 4y ago
        Longer than that. The first electric cars were over a century ago. Battery tech is even older than that, maybe another century. It took many lifetimes for the tech to get to where it is today.
- WithinReason 4y ago
  But why ban hydrogen fuelled cars?
  - bryanlarsen 4y ago
    Virtually all hydrogen fuelled vehicles use fuel cells, so do not use combustion engines, so wouldn't be banned.
    - sandworm101 4y ago
      Yet.
KennyBlanken 4y ago
Toyota is infamous for their resistance to BEVs and their insistence on sticking with cars that have ICEs. They've gone so far as to distribute corporate propaganda to grade schoolers that "teaches" them that BEVs are evil and hybrids are "better." It's for several reasons, interwoven. One, Toyota lagged behind everyone else. VW and GM, the other giants, are far ahead of them. Even Nissan, the shittiest manufacturer in Japan, is far ahead of them. Took them a bit (the Leaf was a joke until its most recent incarnation because of Nissan's cost-cutting, refusing to implement proper, liquid-based thermal management.) Toyota, and the Japanese economy, are heavily dependent upon the Japanese replacing their cars every few years, which is why they obsessively re-style their products with little changes "under the hood." For something like decades the Corolla by and large did not change much except for body panels and interior changes. Another reason people replace their cars is the unreliability as they exit the warranty period. BEVs are much more reliable, so people won't replace them as often. Japan's economy is heavily dependent upon a huge cottage industry of mom and pop car part suppliers, and BEVs are both vastly simpler and much more reliable, meaning there will be far less demand for parts during manufacture, in warranty, and post-warranty sales. Japan's economy is also heavily dependent upon people replacing their cars often, as previously mentioned, to keep fueling the whole industry. Further, they export a huge number of used vehicles, mostly to the rest of Asia - and there's a very large industry around that. Transporting the cars, evaluating their condition, auctioning them, shipping them. If people keep their cars longer, that all grinds to a halt...particularly because the cars often go to countries where frankly there's little hope of there being EV infrastructure any time soon. So as used EVs enter Japan's used car export economy, nobody will want them. Because nobody will want them, auction buyers won't buy them. So dealers won't be able to get much money for the cars. Which means they won't be able to offer good trade-in values. Which means people won't be able to afford buying a Toyota Camry with differently shaped headlights and bumpers every 3 years. Which means the Japanese economy, frankly, grinds to a halt. Further: Dealers make all their money on maintenance and service, especially out-of-warranty. BEVs require far less maintenance and service. So dealers are pissed about the huge drop in income from these BEVs. So keeping ICEs means dealers keep getting maintenance and service on the engines. By the way: another reason Toyota changes the headlights/taillights bumpers so often? They're the most commonly damaged in a collision, and by changing them constantly (and assuring that only one or two model years will fit a car...saaaaay, by making them stretch deep into other body panels like the front fenders with long bits that, oh by the way, happen to be pretty fragile!), they get to keep the parts expensive, and aftermarket suppliers (and the used car parts industry) have a nearly impossible time keeping up. Further by-the-way: some cars, it's incredibly difficult to change the headlight bulb. Guess why? That's right: helping dealers inflate the labor costs for a bulb change. 15 minutes at $120/hour isn't sexy. But if you have to take apart a dozen things in the engine compartment? Why, now you can justify an hour's labor!...and because your techs are probably paid for the "book time", they figure out how to do it a lot faster....and both the dealership and tech make out like bandits, while the customer gets fucked for the full book time labor charge.

kybernetyk 4y ago

hydrogen isn't the only option. co2 neutral synthetic fuels (ones which have been manufactured in a way that burning them would create 0 net co2 emissions) would be a great alternative to enslaving 3rd world kids to dig up all the lithium needed so software engineers in the west can drive EVs and feel better about themselves.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

numbers_guy 4y ago

If hydrogen for cars is a pipedream then aviation will never be green, because that is the only viable option we have. If we manage to greenify aviation, then there's nothing saying we cannot go one step further and start driving hydrogen fueled cars.

lennixm 4y ago
Hydrogen is a pipe dream because it's both a worse user experience and less efficient than EVs. If we could we would electrify planes too but the unfortunately the energy density of electric battery is way too small for large planes meaning we have to use hydrogen (or SAFs) out of necessity.

000ooo000 4y ago

If there's a place in the world for pedants, it's in addressing clickbait or manipulative headlines. Someone's gotta call these garbage journalists out.