3 ms·

>And what is hydrogen but fuel made from water? 98% of H2 is made from fossil fuels. You know why, right?

_hypx 4y ago
So is the vast majority of electricity. Take away hydropower and nuclear, and it's something like 85%. Use to be 99% at one point.
- somewhat_drunk 4y ago
  98% of H2 is made from fossil fuels because cracking water is very expensive. H2 is already expensive when reformed from natural gas - you can expect to pay 20-30 cents per mile to travel in the most advanced, fuel efficient H2 vehicle out there. https://www.hydrogeninsight.com/transport/exclusive-fresh-blow-for-hydrogen-vehicles-as-average-pump-prices-in-california-rise-by-a-third-to-all-time-high/2-1-1351675 https://www.hydrogeninsight.com/transport/exclusive-fresh-bl... H2 made via electrolysis is a bit more than 3x that cost. Are you ready to pay $1 per mile to drive? Of course, price generally declines with volume, so we could expect those numbers to come down if H2 were more widely adopted. But there is a thermodynamic floor on the cost of H2, which means that it will never be cost-competitive with pure electric vehicles. https://medium.com/10x-curiosity/the-hydrogen-hopium-ea11c7ac1095 https://medium.com/10x-curiosity/the-hydrogen-hopium-ea11c7a... And then there's the complexity issue. As a former fuel cell engineer, I understand better than most how complex and finicky proton exchange membrane fuel cell systems are. They are easily poisoned, they're prone to freezing, they have long startup times, they require high-speed, expensive electric air compressors, and they have complex valving and sensors to ensure safe operation. Purely electric vehicles simply do not have these problems. A battery and a motor is about as simple as a drivetrain can possibly be. EVs will always be fundamentally far simpler than FCEVs, which translates into a lower upfront vehicle cost. You have no answer to these problems. I suggest you stop furiously responding here and instead consider your biases, and reevaluate your position. Batteries are so much better than H2 for transportation on just about all fronts that the two are not even close to comparable. H2 at this point is a malicious distraction being foisted on the general public by oil companies attempting to stay relevant, and governments engaging in sunk cost fallacious thinking. The sooner fuel cells for transport (and H2 for heating) are relegated to history's dustbin, the better. Oh, and as for your assertion that electricity sans nuclear and hydro is 85% fossil fuels... that's true... and irrelevant. 40% of electricity generated in the US today is renewable, and that number grows steadily each year. We would be absolutely foolish to use that electricity to crack water, compress the H2, transport the H2, and convert it back to electricity in fuel cells, losing 65% of the energy in the process, than simply using it directly via batteries. Come on man! Discard the propaganda, separate your emotions from your positions, and think for yourself!
  - _hypx 4y ago
    And it's soon to be very cheap, just like the rest of green energy. You're basically stuck in the past and citing people who are also stuck in the past. A fuel cell is also an electrochemical system. An FCEV is also an EV. Same electric motors and everything. They can attain the same level of efficiency as a li-ion battery and not any more complex. Less complex even, if you seriously analyze the complexity of the battery pack. And because of that, it can easily displace BEVs. I don't know your background, but your writing is that of a bullshit artist. It completely ignores basic facts and substitute BEV propaganda.
    - somewhat_drunk 4y ago
      >They can attain the same level of efficiency as a li-ion battery and not any more complex. No, they cannot attain the same level of efficiency. It's not even close, and no one who was arguing in good faith and had done even the most cursory research on the issue would make that absurd claim. https://tide.theimi.org.uk/industry-latest/motorpro/efficiency-fuel-cells-vs-battery-electric#:~:text=Comparing%20efficiency&text=The%20result%20from%20the%20data,some%20of%20it%20is%20lost https://tide.theimi.org.uk/industry-latest/motorpro/efficien.... https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/mirai-fcev-vs-model-3-bev-paul-martin/ https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/mirai-fcev-vs-model-3-bev-pau... You're just making stuff up. We're done here.
      - _hypx 4y ago
        Wrong. Both are electrochemical systems. Both have a limit of 100% efficiency in theory. The fact that you don't know this suggests you're a giant bullshitter this whole time.
  - ephbit 4y ago
    What's your view on FCEV long haul trucks? Do you see BEV becoming the dominant truck technology? If FCEV trucks were to take off as a technology and get to a share of say 30 % of all trucks in some region, then I'd speculate that the FCEV tech in itself would ultimately displace BEV not only in the truck but also partially in the car sector.

So is the vast majority of electricity. Take away hydropower and nuclear, and it's something like 85%. Use to be 99% at one point.

somewhat_drunk 4y ago
98% of H2 is made from fossil fuels because cracking water is very expensive. H2 is already expensive when reformed from natural gas - you can expect to pay 20-30 cents per mile to travel in the most advanced, fuel efficient H2 vehicle out there. https://www.hydrogeninsight.com/transport/exclusive-fresh-blow-for-hydrogen-vehicles-as-average-pump-prices-in-california-rise-by-a-third-to-all-time-high/2-1-1351675 https://www.hydrogeninsight.com/transport/exclusive-fresh-bl... H2 made via electrolysis is a bit more than 3x that cost. Are you ready to pay $1 per mile to drive? Of course, price generally declines with volume, so we could expect those numbers to come down if H2 were more widely adopted. But there is a thermodynamic floor on the cost of H2, which means that it will never be cost-competitive with pure electric vehicles. https://medium.com/10x-curiosity/the-hydrogen-hopium-ea11c7ac1095 https://medium.com/10x-curiosity/the-hydrogen-hopium-ea11c7a... And then there's the complexity issue. As a former fuel cell engineer, I understand better than most how complex and finicky proton exchange membrane fuel cell systems are. They are easily poisoned, they're prone to freezing, they have long startup times, they require high-speed, expensive electric air compressors, and they have complex valving and sensors to ensure safe operation. Purely electric vehicles simply do not have these problems. A battery and a motor is about as simple as a drivetrain can possibly be. EVs will always be fundamentally far simpler than FCEVs, which translates into a lower upfront vehicle cost. You have no answer to these problems. I suggest you stop furiously responding here and instead consider your biases, and reevaluate your position. Batteries are so much better than H2 for transportation on just about all fronts that the two are not even close to comparable. H2 at this point is a malicious distraction being foisted on the general public by oil companies attempting to stay relevant, and governments engaging in sunk cost fallacious thinking. The sooner fuel cells for transport (and H2 for heating) are relegated to history's dustbin, the better. Oh, and as for your assertion that electricity sans nuclear and hydro is 85% fossil fuels... that's true... and irrelevant. 40% of electricity generated in the US today is renewable, and that number grows steadily each year. We would be absolutely foolish to use that electricity to crack water, compress the H2, transport the H2, and convert it back to electricity in fuel cells, losing 65% of the energy in the process, than simply using it directly via batteries. Come on man! Discard the propaganda, separate your emotions from your positions, and think for yourself!
- _hypx 4y ago
  And it's soon to be very cheap, just like the rest of green energy. You're basically stuck in the past and citing people who are also stuck in the past. A fuel cell is also an electrochemical system. An FCEV is also an EV. Same electric motors and everything. They can attain the same level of efficiency as a li-ion battery and not any more complex. Less complex even, if you seriously analyze the complexity of the battery pack. And because of that, it can easily displace BEVs. I don't know your background, but your writing is that of a bullshit artist. It completely ignores basic facts and substitute BEV propaganda.
  - somewhat_drunk 4y ago
    >They can attain the same level of efficiency as a li-ion battery and not any more complex. No, they cannot attain the same level of efficiency. It's not even close, and no one who was arguing in good faith and had done even the most cursory research on the issue would make that absurd claim. https://tide.theimi.org.uk/industry-latest/motorpro/efficiency-fuel-cells-vs-battery-electric#:~:text=Comparing%20efficiency&text=The%20result%20from%20the%20data,some%20of%20it%20is%20lost https://tide.theimi.org.uk/industry-latest/motorpro/efficien.... https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/mirai-fcev-vs-model-3-bev-paul-martin/ https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/mirai-fcev-vs-model-3-bev-pau... You're just making stuff up. We're done here.
    - _hypx 4y ago
      Wrong. Both are electrochemical systems. Both have a limit of 100% efficiency in theory. The fact that you don't know this suggests you're a giant bullshitter this whole time.
- ephbit 4y ago
  What's your view on FCEV long haul trucks? Do you see BEV becoming the dominant truck technology? If FCEV trucks were to take off as a technology and get to a share of say 30 % of all trucks in some region, then I'd speculate that the FCEV tech in itself would ultimately displace BEV not only in the truck but also partially in the car sector.