No— it is more viable to set up cryogenic hydrogen infrastructure at an airport than replacing our gas stations with hydrogen stations along our roads today. Additionally, the amount of cooling, insulation, and pressurization equipment required will almost certainly be far too large and expensive to fit in a $20-30k passenger vehicle.
Realistically, if we assume a decarbonized future, it’s seeming that battery electric will be used in most small passenger vehicles (cars and trucks today), whereas hydrogen will be used in heavy equipment (construction, extraction, military) and aviation.
The commercial trucks could fit the equipment, yes. However, you also need to consider the infrastructure. What would be the investment required to replace every truck stop with hydrogen refilling stations?
Could it be done? Yes. Is it the most likely option? Harder to say.
Toyota only seems to work on alternative fuels for the PR and propaganda, unfortunately.
That’s always been slightly better than almost every other car manufacturer, which pretends only oil exists, but not by much since they are basically gaslighting us all.
Naa, they know that without a major leap in battery capabilities, hydrogen is way easier to swap over to. Existing gas stations can be converted quickly, you can fill up a hydrogen car in a few seconds/minutes unlike EVs, and the current ICE’s can be basically reused to handle hydrogen (the design not the motor in your current car just the design). It’s a no brainier to go towards this.
I agree with all of that but the issue is between the governments and the manufacturers both seeming to want the other to roll out the upgraded infrastructure, it puts hydrogen in a chicken and an egg situation of us waiting to see which comes first, the cars or the chargers.
At least with electric you simply need to swap out the sources at the ground level to something cleaner(something we’re doing anyways), and you can safely plug in anywhere.
Don’t get me wrong, I love the idea of hydrogen, but as a scientist, it’s the implementation that has me worried.
I see the most likely outcome being legislated electric charging at petrol stations(like Germany has just done), possibly with subsidies, while the bulk of hydrogen infrastructure is private investment.
Once a bean counter finds it more valuable to retrofit a truck fleet with hydrogen and set up their own refuelling stations at distribution centres - i.e. for journeys that can be completed in one tank load - you bet the hydrogen will start to flow. From there it’ll be up to the service station network to figure out if it’s worthwhile to put infrastructure in at certain larger truck stops.
By the time we get there, the trucks will be mostly autonomous and the driver probably just an emergency role - so they’ll run as close to 24/7 as possible and the reduced refuelling time will have a substantial impact. It’ll either be that, or some sort of massive battery bank transfer system the truck can pull into to have it’s battery swapped - but batteries are heavy, and automating that would be inordinately expensive. Hydrogen seems more feasible a fossil fuel replacement when trip length/refueling time are your main concerns
You nailed it. At the end of the day, EVs are really only practical for people who don’t drive much. Not only that, you would absolutely need a battery swap system. Or each gas station would need to become a damn substation for the power company. Trying to draw that much power is unfeasible.
Fuel cells can be more efficient than combustion because of direct electrification. With combustion, there needs to be a boiler, turbine, etc and that adds to the losses through the system.
At industrial scale, it is possible a turbine and boiler is probably the better bet, because the technology is very mature and large fuel cells may pose extra challenges with sourcing the membranes. It would need a more in-depth cost analysis.
No— it is more viable to set up cryogenic hydrogen infrastructure at an airport than replacing our gas stations with hydrogen stations along our roads today. Additionally, the amount of cooling, insulation, and pressurization equipment required will almost certainly be far too large and expensive to fit in a $20-30k passenger vehicle.
Realistically, if we assume a decarbonized future, it’s seeming that battery electric will be used in most small passenger vehicles (cars and trucks today), whereas hydrogen will be used in heavy equipment (construction, extraction, military) and aviation.
We could probably overhaul commercial trucks with hydrogen based electrical, they’re pretty big.
The commercial trucks could fit the equipment, yes. However, you also need to consider the infrastructure. What would be the investment required to replace every truck stop with hydrogen refilling stations?
Could it be done? Yes. Is it the most likely option? Harder to say.
Easier to retrofit a gas station with hydrogen tanks than it is to build substations at the gas station to help with the power draw from evs charging.
You better tell that to Toyota and a lot of the other big players who are quietly still working on hydrogen ICE vehicles.
At most it could work for huge trucks but the economy doesn’t scale.
Toyota only seems to work on alternative fuels for the PR and propaganda, unfortunately.
That’s always been slightly better than almost every other car manufacturer, which pretends only oil exists, but not by much since they are basically gaslighting us all.
Naa, they know that without a major leap in battery capabilities, hydrogen is way easier to swap over to. Existing gas stations can be converted quickly, you can fill up a hydrogen car in a few seconds/minutes unlike EVs, and the current ICE’s can be basically reused to handle hydrogen (the design not the motor in your current car just the design). It’s a no brainier to go towards this.
I agree with all of that but the issue is between the governments and the manufacturers both seeming to want the other to roll out the upgraded infrastructure, it puts hydrogen in a chicken and an egg situation of us waiting to see which comes first, the cars or the chargers.
At least with electric you simply need to swap out the sources at the ground level to something cleaner(something we’re doing anyways), and you can safely plug in anywhere.
Don’t get me wrong, I love the idea of hydrogen, but as a scientist, it’s the implementation that has me worried.
I see the most likely outcome being legislated electric charging at petrol stations(like Germany has just done), possibly with subsidies, while the bulk of hydrogen infrastructure is private investment.
Once a bean counter finds it more valuable to retrofit a truck fleet with hydrogen and set up their own refuelling stations at distribution centres - i.e. for journeys that can be completed in one tank load - you bet the hydrogen will start to flow. From there it’ll be up to the service station network to figure out if it’s worthwhile to put infrastructure in at certain larger truck stops.
By the time we get there, the trucks will be mostly autonomous and the driver probably just an emergency role - so they’ll run as close to 24/7 as possible and the reduced refuelling time will have a substantial impact. It’ll either be that, or some sort of massive battery bank transfer system the truck can pull into to have it’s battery swapped - but batteries are heavy, and automating that would be inordinately expensive. Hydrogen seems more feasible a fossil fuel replacement when trip length/refueling time are your main concerns
You nailed it. At the end of the day, EVs are really only practical for people who don’t drive much. Not only that, you would absolutely need a battery swap system. Or each gas station would need to become a damn substation for the power company. Trying to draw that much power is unfeasible.
Most people don’t have a gas pump at home/work. I don’t think ICE cars can ever replace the way people use EVs.
Most small towns don’t have substations either. Do remember the more people with EVs the greater the power draw.
It’s effectively the same though, if the electricity for the small vehicles is generated by burning hydrogen
It’s a fuel cell, it doesn’t “burn” hydrogen.
You wouldn’t really need fuel cells at a power plant though, would you? Or are there advantages I’m unaware of?
Fuel cells can be more efficient than combustion because of direct electrification. With combustion, there needs to be a boiler, turbine, etc and that adds to the losses through the system.
At industrial scale, it is possible a turbine and boiler is probably the better bet, because the technology is very mature and large fuel cells may pose extra challenges with sourcing the membranes. It would need a more in-depth cost analysis.
but theres many ways to generate electricity that dont include hydrogen.
Why not use it if the technology exists and has a use case?
Or is this more of the “OMG but the HINDENBURG!” Nonsense?
It’s not quite nonsense, though. Are hydrogen fires ready to handle?
We already deal with compressed gas in a lot of cities, so this isn’t an issue.
True.