3 ms·

You’re own anti-hydrogen tirade is equally ignorant. A fuel cell is an electrochemical system just like a li-ion battery. It has more or less the same basic pro

by _hypx 3y ago

You’re own anti-hydrogen tirade is equally ignorant. A fuel cell is an electrochemical system just like a li-ion battery. It has more or less the same basic pros and cons. This includes efficiency, and we can expect eventual parity between fuel cells and conventional batteries on this issue. Which is why so many in the industry are pretty convinced that it will be hydrogen vehicles as the path forward beyond BEVs. They are EVs without the enormous raw material needs, and have both longer ranges and refuel like ICE cars.

schiffern 3y ago
>This includes efficiency, and we can expect eventual parity between fuel cells and conventional batteries This is completely unphysical, and reveals that your knowledge goes no deeper than "fuel cells are electrochemical systems." In any proton exchange membrane you (by definition) lose 50% of the theoretical chemical energy as the proton crosses the membrane. Some fuel cells try to use this waste heat somehow, which is how they try to claim >50% efficiency. >Which is why so many in the industry are pretty convinced that it will be hydrogen vehicles as the path forward beyond BEVs. No, fuel cells are nothing more than a shiny distraction for legacy ICE makers to wave in front of regulators, in a desperate attempt to delay their disruption by EVs. For this purpose, the fact that fuel cells are fundamentally unworkable is a feature, not a bug. Fuel cells will never threaten their ICE profit center, but because their unworkability is non-obvious the legacy automakers can still make a case that's plausible enough to fool (non-technical) regulators. >They are EVs without the enormous raw material needs If they could figure out how to make a long-lived fuel cell without platinum, maybe that would be true.
- _hypx 3y ago
  > This is completely unphysical, and reveals that your knowledge goes no deeper than "fuel cells are electrochemical systems." > In any proton exchange membrane you (by definition) lose 50% of the theoretical chemical energy as the proton crosses the membrane. Some fuel cells try to use this waste heat somehow, which is how they try to claim >50% efficiency. You are suffering from Dunning-Kruger syndrome. It's already been proven that fuel cells can attain 100% efficiency. https://www.dynamictidalpower.eu/resources/Documenten/Maximum_conversion_efficiency_of_hydroge.pdf https://www.dynamictidalpower.eu/resources/Documenten/Maximu... Not to mention that you're own claims are factually wrong since efficiencies exceeding 50% have already been obtain before any heat reuse. > No, fuel cells are nothing more than a shiny distraction for legacy ICE makers to wave in front of regulators, in a desperate attempt to delay their disruption by EVs. Fuel cells cars are literally EVs. This profound misunderstanding of the facts suggests that you are working entirely off of BEV propaganda. Your claims are pure gibberish and nonsensical. Also, synfuels and hydrogen-ICE cars have been tested now. So it isn't even a motivation anymore, since ICE cars can also be zero emissions. In fact, pro-BEV bullshit is permanently stuck in the mid-2000s, not realizing that technology has long since moved on. > If they could figure out how to make a long-lived fuel cell without platinum, maybe that would be true. Platinum use is comparable to a catalytic convertor: https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/bosch-ev-fuel-cells-less-platinum-report/ https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/bosch-ev-fuel-cells-less-... It is not an issue to begin with.
  - schiffern 3y ago
    >You are suffering from Dunning-Kruger syndrome. It's already been proven that fuel cells can attain 100% efficiency. >Not to mention that you're own claims are factually wrong since efficiencies exceeding 50% have already been obtain before any heat reuse. Apparently you missed the part where I specified proton exchange membrane fuel cells. Spoiler: all the EV fuel cells out there are PEM design. There's gotta be some sort of inviolable internet rule that the first person to mention Dunning-Kruger in a discussion is the person who most egregiously suffers from it. >Fuel cells cars are literally EVs. This profound misunderstanding of the facts... ::eyeroll:: Dramatic much? I said EVs instead of BEVs. Big deal. We both knew exactly what I meant. Only one of us chose to disingenuously clutch their pearls about such a pedantic, nitpicking correction. Since you're evidently so worried that I might have intellectual deficiencies in this area: yes, I was aware that fuel cell cars are electric vehicles. Thank you for your concern. >Also, synfuels and hydrogen-ICE cars have been tested now. ...and the efficiency (and thus the economics) is terrible, just like I said. >Platinum use is comparable to a catalytic convertor ...and catalytic converters don't scale to the entire world's vehicle fleet either, as India and China both amply demonstrate. Don't be fooled by their (relatively recent) laws requiring them for automobiles. Both nations are still heavily dependent on large two- and three-wheeled fleets, which lack converters.

by _hypx 3y ago

schiffern 3y ago

>This includes efficiency, and we can expect eventual parity between fuel cells and conventional batteries This is completely unphysical, and reveals that your knowledge goes no deeper than "fuel cells are electrochemical systems." In any proton exchange membrane you (by definition) lose 50% of the theoretical chemical energy as the proton crosses the membrane. Some fuel cells try to use this waste heat somehow, which is how they try to claim >50% efficiency. >Which is why so many in the industry are pretty convinced that it will be hydrogen vehicles as the path forward beyond BEVs. No, fuel cells are nothing more than a shiny distraction for legacy ICE makers to wave in front of regulators, in a desperate attempt to delay their disruption by EVs. For this purpose, the fact that fuel cells are fundamentally unworkable is a feature, not a bug. Fuel cells will never threaten their ICE profit center, but because their unworkability is non-obvious the legacy automakers can still make a case that's plausible enough to fool (non-technical) regulators. >They are EVs without the enormous raw material needs If they could figure out how to make a long-lived fuel cell without platinum, maybe that would be true.

_hypx 3y ago
> This is completely unphysical, and reveals that your knowledge goes no deeper than "fuel cells are electrochemical systems." > In any proton exchange membrane you (by definition) lose 50% of the theoretical chemical energy as the proton crosses the membrane. Some fuel cells try to use this waste heat somehow, which is how they try to claim >50% efficiency. You are suffering from Dunning-Kruger syndrome. It's already been proven that fuel cells can attain 100% efficiency. https://www.dynamictidalpower.eu/resources/Documenten/Maximum_conversion_efficiency_of_hydroge.pdf https://www.dynamictidalpower.eu/resources/Documenten/Maximu... Not to mention that you're own claims are factually wrong since efficiencies exceeding 50% have already been obtain before any heat reuse. > No, fuel cells are nothing more than a shiny distraction for legacy ICE makers to wave in front of regulators, in a desperate attempt to delay their disruption by EVs. Fuel cells cars are literally EVs. This profound misunderstanding of the facts suggests that you are working entirely off of BEV propaganda. Your claims are pure gibberish and nonsensical. Also, synfuels and hydrogen-ICE cars have been tested now. So it isn't even a motivation anymore, since ICE cars can also be zero emissions. In fact, pro-BEV bullshit is permanently stuck in the mid-2000s, not realizing that technology has long since moved on. > If they could figure out how to make a long-lived fuel cell without platinum, maybe that would be true. Platinum use is comparable to a catalytic convertor: https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/bosch-ev-fuel-cells-less-platinum-report/ https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/bosch-ev-fuel-cells-less-... It is not an issue to begin with.
- schiffern 3y ago
  >You are suffering from Dunning-Kruger syndrome. It's already been proven that fuel cells can attain 100% efficiency. >Not to mention that you're own claims are factually wrong since efficiencies exceeding 50% have already been obtain before any heat reuse. Apparently you missed the part where I specified proton exchange membrane fuel cells. Spoiler: all the EV fuel cells out there are PEM design. There's gotta be some sort of inviolable internet rule that the first person to mention Dunning-Kruger in a discussion is the person who most egregiously suffers from it. >Fuel cells cars are literally EVs. This profound misunderstanding of the facts... ::eyeroll:: Dramatic much? I said EVs instead of BEVs. Big deal. We both knew exactly what I meant. Only one of us chose to disingenuously clutch their pearls about such a pedantic, nitpicking correction. Since you're evidently so worried that I might have intellectual deficiencies in this area: yes, I was aware that fuel cell cars are electric vehicles. Thank you for your concern. >Also, synfuels and hydrogen-ICE cars have been tested now. ...and the efficiency (and thus the economics) is terrible, just like I said. >Platinum use is comparable to a catalytic convertor ...and catalytic converters don't scale to the entire world's vehicle fleet either, as India and China both amply demonstrate. Don't be fooled by their (relatively recent) laws requiring them for automobiles. Both nations are still heavily dependent on large two- and three-wheeled fleets, which lack converters.