Hypx

9 ms·

31.
by Hypx 6y ago
From a theoretical standpoint, you don't need to worry about that. You can conceive of metal hydrides or other forms of dense hydrogen storage. Even as LH₂, you're still looking at around 2700 Wh/L of energy. That's well
32.
by Hypx 6y ago
Hydrogen energy density is around 39,000 Wh/kg. That's rarely going to the limiting factor. The physical limitations are nearly the same as natural gas, which is to say they are easily solvable. Superconducting wires will have the
33.
by Hypx 6y ago
Those losses can be made much less than that. Theoretical minimal losses are on the order of 1-2kWh per kg, and in practice not much more than that[1]. Further efficiency improvements can get reality even closer to theoretical. Most of thes
34.
by Hypx 6y ago
There's nothing stopping FCEVs from being as efficient as BEVs. Even now, huge improvements are being found like 90% efficient electrolysis[1]. Future improvements in hydrogen and fuel cell technology could close the gap entirely. Like
35.
by Hypx 6y ago
You can't build a "lead" as if this was a race. For one thing, there's no finish line. There's nothing stopping fuel cell cars from having their own technology revolution and a S-curve like adoption curve that displ
36.
by Hypx 6y ago
Yes, but people get confused. Hence why EVs should be referred to as BEVs, and fuel cell cars as FCEVs.
37.
by Hypx 6y ago
The fundamental problem is that EVs might be doomed once fuel cell cars come around. Nearly all of the criticism of this argument are just a mirror of the arguments against EVs (often made by pro-EV people no less). So the real misunderstan
38.
by Hypx 6y ago
This is such a bland take these days. Basically every EV owner says the exact same thing. Do any EV owners ever ask themselves "What if I were wrong?" Or better yet, ask themselves "What is the scenario where I am wrong?&quot
39.
by Hypx 6y ago
They certainly could. We just live in the pre-"Model T" era of fuel cell cars.
40.
by Hypx 6y ago
It's been done for decades: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underground_hydrogen_storage It's pretty well-established tech at this point.
41.
by Hypx 6y ago
It's underground salt caverns. This is extremely feasible and has been done for decades with natural gas.
42.
by Hypx 6y ago
Hydrogen could achieve something like 84.8 PWh: https://www.pv-magazine.com/2020/06/16/hydrogen-storage-in-s... While it's unlikely to reach this value, it's such a high figure that actually can sol
43.
by Hypx 6y ago
Internal combustion could be with us for a long time.
44.
by Hypx 6y ago
And what if fuel cell electric vehicles became the future? Wouldn't you have completely gotten it wrong?
45.
by Hypx 6y ago
The tanks are physically smaller than batteries. The limitation is with packaging, not the technology itself. Future fuel cell cars with just have multiple small tanks instead of a few big ones.
46.
by Hypx 6y ago
The Mirai is a much larger car than the Model 3.
47.
by Hypx 6y ago
You still have nickel and manganese. Plus secondary metals like copper and tin for the electronics. You should google the Riversimple Rasa. Hydrogen cars can be made far lighter than EVs.
48.
by Hypx 6y ago
There now exists hydrogen burning internal combustion engines. It raises the question of how important is the need for a liquid hydrocarbon fuel.
49.
by Hypx 6y ago
As opposed to being a luddite? These inefficiencies aren't a big deal, and as I said they'll continue to shrink. People are also totally unaware of just how much progress is being made. There's a global rush to deploy as much
50.
by Hypx 6y ago
Like everything you said in this conversation, you drastically exaggerate the inefficiencies of fuel cells. In practice, batteries and fuel cells are already close enough that it has ceased to be a major roadblock. Fuel cells getting more e
51.
by Hypx 6y ago
Your own driving needs are not everyone else's drivers needs. 20 supercharger uses per year means you wasted more time than refueling a gasoline car 40 times a year. Fuel cell cars that can do both would be more convenient than either.
52.
by Hypx 6y ago
If you can electrolyze water at home, the compression step is not a hard problem anymore. This is more trolling than a serious counterargument. Alternatively, you can have hydrogen piped to the house instead of home electrolysis. You should
53.
by Hypx 6y ago
> Its a a series of pumps, filter and tubes, and that is if we don't consider the tank. All of that is IN ADDITION to everything a normal EV also has. As if battery powered cars have no pumps, filters and tubes... And a tank is lite
54.
by Hypx 6y ago
Unless you need to drive beyond the limits of your battery, at which point a gasoline powered vehicle makes more sense. I get the feeling your belief system is a post hoc rationalization since you’re just ignoring a major use case. If it re
55.
by Hypx 6y ago
Why not? A company called Lavo is selling such a thing right now. You should realize that weight steals from your efficiency. A fuel cell can be less efficiency, but still gets you a similar distance on the same amount of energy. If you can
56.
by Hypx 6y ago
Again, either with drivers or geofenced.
57.
by Hypx 6y ago
That's just a big pile of misinformation. A fuel cell is pretty simple device. It's literally a type of battery not much different than a li-ion battery. The "complexity " you speak of is just a series of pumps and filte
58.
by Hypx 6y ago
You can probably refuel a hydrogen car at home eventually too. The problem with electric cars is that there's not a single thing that fuel cell cars can't replicate.
59.
by Hypx 6y ago
The breakthrough might just be hydrogen fuel cells getting efficient enough that it's no longer an issue.
60.
by Hypx 6y ago
Eventually, you want the ownership experience of the gasoline car without the emissions. So much of the argument against them are short-term only. You have to assume there will be fuel cell cars that are fast and desirable as the technolog

More ›