Comments by "Simon" (@Simon-dm8zv) on "Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars Aren't The Dumbest Thing. But... | Answers With Joe" video.

  1. Mar Tijn Those are not valid points. 1. You start about how inefficient and polluting electricity production is, but this is not relevant as both hydrogen and batteries start with electricity. 2. Lithium mining is not as invasive or damaging to the environment as many people believe. Most lithium is extracted from brine lakes by evaporation. Emissions per kWh battery capacity have been decreasing over the past years to below 100 kg CO2 per kWh. This will improve further. Also, fuel cells require other ‘rare’ earth materials like platinum and they often wear out faster than batteries. 3. There won’t be enough surplus energy for decades to generate enough hydrogen for cars. Don’t forget that industrial applications require green hydrogen first before we waste it to cars. Also, surplus can be perfectly stored in charging EVs.
    4
  2. Exactly sir.
    3
  3.  Supertech  That was fake news. It takes about 50.000 kilometers to make up for battery production emissions. So about three years.
    2
  4. ScoraX That sounds better already. When you do your research (just some basics) about BEVs and FCEVs you will soon find out how stupid driving on hydrogen actually is and that the downsides of it cannot be solved by some simple technological development. Using hydrogen for vehicles in intrinsically inefficient, complex and expensive.
    2
  5.  @lopardie  Driving electric is always the least polluting option. Even when the electricity comes from fossil sources.
    2
  6. Jules Slim The load never changes capacity. A 60 kWh battery is empty after supplying 60 kW of power for 1 hour. Or 30 kW for 2 hours. Or 15 kW for 4 hours. The capacity always remains 60 kWh.
    2
  7. Jules Slim Na sorry man it just does not make sense to mix up power and energy in any situation - nor for batteries. The problem is when you are talking about a ‘60 kW battery’ (while you actually mean kWh) it doesn’t mean the battery is capable of delivering that 60 kW of power. It could be rated for only 10 kW power output. But of course the battery energy capacity still remains 60 kWh!
    2
  8. By that time batteries will be so much better, cheaper and faster to recharge that nobody would want the complexity and hassle of hydrogen.
    1
  9. Chris W Probably a bit, but by far not enough because you will be running against laws of physics to improve efficiency considerably. A battery electric car is at least a factor 3 more efficient.
    1
  10. Ever heard of public chargers along the street?
    1
  11. Super inefficient
    1
  12. Genuine Gameplays How would you produce HHO?
    1
  13. Genuine Gameplays You would need A LOT of solar panels to run a car on this. Would be much more efficient to simply charge your EV with solar.
    1
  14. RadicalErin Combusting H2 is even more inefficient than using it in a fuel cell. Also, for FCEVs you would need three times the amount of solar and wind to drive the same distance as an EV.
    1
  15. RadicalErin Combusting H2 is so insanely inefficient that we would be better off using gasoline. Tesla batteries perform very well over the years and have the least degradation in the industry. Lithium is not the problem.
    1
  16. RadicalErin You clearly don’t have your facts together. There is more than enough lithium in the world and extraction is not invasive. Look up brine lakes. Driving on hydrogen is 3 times less efficient so we need 3 times the amount of solar, wind or other renewables to create enough of it. That’s impossible. Also, here is some info on Tesla battery degradation: electrek.co/2018/04/14/tesla-battery-degradation-data/amp/
    1
  17. RadicalErin xD
    1
  18. Alex N nope dude 😂
    1
  19. It's not relevant. He didn't mention how much energy and carbon it takes to mine the materials for the combustion engine production right?
    1
  20. Exactly sir.
    1
  21. Has been done to a Model S years ago by a guy in The Netherlands. Is still driving around. Look up 'Hesla'. It is probably the most useless modification you can perform on a Tesla because it is just a waste of money and energy. Teslas are capable of super fast charging and already have a great range. No need to solve non-existent problems. And charging a battery from a fuel cell? Why would you make an inefficient system even more inefficient? Better drive the motor directly from the fuel cell if you are even doing it.
    1
  22. Charlie Horse In my comment I explained why it is a useless idea.
    1
  23. You have to look at it in the other way. Sure, walking, cycling and taking the train is by far the best option. But people will still be buying cars, whether they are electric or not. So if someone decides to buy a vehicle, the choice for an EV is a far better option.
    1
  24. Charging is not an issue. You can build chargers at any parking spot. Hydrogen is stupid because we would need three times the amount of electricity to keep the world driving.
    1
  25. M M get your facts together. Don’t spread BS.
    1
  26. No.
    1
  27. It's the other way around. Big oil loves hydrogen because it would be the only way to keep producing, transporting and selling gaseous products. But fortunately battery tech seems to be winning already. Yes even for trucks.
    1
  28. Still not efficient.
    1
  29. There is no difference. If you plug in your car, you go to a fast charger.
    1
  30. blablabla all common misconceptions and even if they are partly true it still is not a reason to go down the insanely inefficient hydrogen route.
    1
  31. Battery swapping has been tried by Tesla and a company called Better Place. They both stopped offering these services because it was not cost effective compared to rapid charging. Making onboard hydrogen is useless because you would need to generate A LOT of it in order to drive a few kilometers with it due to the horrible efficiency. Even charging a battery directly with solar on a cars roof only creates about 20 km of range on very sunny day.
    1
  32. ​ @triumvir_hunt You cannot setup a whole swapping industry on used and salavaged batteries. The problem was that the swapping stations were insanely complex and expensive to build versus putting up a few DC charging points. Hydrogen in cars is doomed because the lack of efficiency is caused by simple laws of physics. It cannot be solved by some simple technological improvement.
    1
  33.  @triumvir_hunt  For certain applications yes. Not for cars. Hydrogen will always remain about three times as expensive as electricity.
    1
  34. ボロ from EU Dreadfully inefficient.
    1
  35. ScoraX Apparently you think that hydrogen cars are better than BEVs but the only thing you can come up with is weight. A Toyota Mirai is not much lighter than a Model S.
    1
  36. Supertech Exactly. That was more than 10 years ago and things are very different now, especially at Tesla. Battery production emissions are now down to about 75 kg of CO2 per kWh battery capacity produced. Also, in these kind of comparisons the fuel consumption of the gasoline vehicle is often estimated way too low and they forget to take up and down stream emissions of gasoline into consideration. 1 liter of gasoline causes 3.1 kg of CO2 in total (production and combustion).
    1
  37. Supertech Yeah I can imagine gas price is a huge factor when choosing a vehicle. Hopefully other parts of the world will make the switch earlier. Here in Europe things are starting to look promising (due to high gas prices lol).
    1
  38. Hydrogen is super expensive dude.
    1
  39. Exactly Carl.
    1
  40. You are so wrong in many ways. Fuel cell cars are a lot more complex, require lots more maintenance and their fuel cells wear out quicker than any battery (200.000 miles).
    1
  41. Leonardo Chudin They last much longer and will then be reused and eventually recycled.
    1
  42. exactly
    1
  43. Public chargers along the street.
    1
  44. Tesla Supercharging is barely slower than hydrogen refueling and A LOT cheaper.
    1
  45. Hydrogen cars don’t have internal combustion engines. They have electric motors and fuel cells.
    1
  46. You forget about the loads of energy (and thus CO2) that go to waste when using hydrogen in cars.
    1
  47. There is.
    1
  48. And your point is?
    1
  49. If you had a little knowledge of physics you would have know that this contraption of Stanley Meyer (which is what you are referring to) was a total scam. No conspiracy at all.
    1
  50. and it is insanely inefficient.
    1
  51. It's not relevant.
    1
  52. Barely makes a difference. FCEVs are heavy as well by the way.
    1
  53. It's not relevant. Construction materials only make up a small part of the car's lifetime emissions. The biggest problem is the burning of hydrocarbons, not using them for materials. We will remain dependent of oil for a long time because of this. For your information: only about 8% of all oil world wide is used for petrochemical applications like the production of plastics.
    1
  54. Chargers along the street are nothing new.
    1
  55. Yeah so simple, it probably doesn't require loads of energy right? ^^
    1
  56. Nice :D
    1
  57. Still not efficient
    1
  58. Exactly sir, this is what most people tend to forget. (by the way energy = kWh)
    1
  59.  @julesslim8229  There is an important difference between kW and kWh. kW = power and kWh = energy. Not the same! It's like saying my petrol tank holds 50 horsepower.
    1
  60. Jules Slim Sorry but you do not seem to understand the difference between power and energy. A battery could easily be capable of providing a POWER output of 60 kW, but if it is empty after half an hour the ENERGY capacity would only be 30 kWh. Wh = watt-hour, not ‘watt per hour’ and is a unit of energy.
    1
  61. Jules Slim You are almost there. A battery that is empty after supplying a power of 60 kW for two hours straight is a 120 kWh battery. The time of a battery sitting still and holding charge has nothing to do with it.
    1
  62. Jules Slim Imagine filling a bucket with water by using a garden hose. Hose diameter = Current in Amp Speed of the water in the hose = Volt Flow rate = Power in Watt (A * V), or horsepower Volume (i.e. gallons) of the bucket is = Watt-hours
    1