Comments by "Simon" (@Simon-dm8zv) on "Undecided with Matt Ferrell" channel.

  1.  @robsengahay5614  Well shipping might indeed be a good application of hydrogen. Heavy trucks maybe as well, but when we look at the test results of the Tesla Semi things look great for batteries. A truck on hydrogen is a lot more expensive to run per kilometer / mile than a battery truck. This is very important for a transportation company. Plus, truck drivers are legally obliged to take a rest every few hours so this makes a perfect situation for plugging that cable in.
    5
  2. lol! One of the worst explanations for why hydrogen is not taking of 'yet' I have seen so far. Quite creative though..
    3
  3. A heat recovery system is what you are looking for. These have been around for quite a while.
    3
  4. not at all
    3
  5.  @robsengahay5614  Could be useful for seasonal storage in the future, not for driving.
    3
  6. Exactly. Hydrogen is dumb for pretty much all road transport.
    2
  7. 1. There are no signs of lithium shortage. 2. Storing electricity in hydrogen is very inefficient so you would be literally throwing energy away. 3. Hydrogen for FCE cars needs to be compressed to several hundreds of bar. You don't want that to be happening in everyone's backyard. 4. You would only need one third of solar panels on your roof to charge a BEV and drive the same amount of kilometers.
    2
  8. Nope
    2
  9. Sure, but we need to be ready when real numbers of used batteries are becoming available. Recycling is not only a matter of gathering material for new batteries, it's also about properly disposing the waste.
    2
  10. Battery busses are already there, battery trucks are around the corner and trains should simply use overhead lines.
    2
  11. So many misconceptions. 1. Energy consumption for preheating electric vehicles really is PEANUTS compared to the insane losses of energy in hydrogen fuel cell cars. 2. EVs don't charge all together at the same time, just like conventional ICE cars and hydrogen cars don't stand in line every day at the same time. 3. EVs charge slowly when you sleep, so you actually save on time for not having to wait for 'filling up'. By the way fast charging is only a matter of half an hour or less. 4. Burning hydrocarbons is FAR worse than producing and using any electric car. Your thought is wrong.
    2
  12. Exactly, you nailed it.
    2
  13. bart h Would still increase air friction. You cannot harvest energy from nothing. It will always require at least the same amount of energy to produce it. ‘Perpetuum mobile’ might be an interesting read for you on wikipedia. Only thing you can do is putting an external source of energy to use like the sun by equipping the vehicle with solar panels. Although this will only have a marginal effect on range.
    2
  14. Japan imports massive amounts of H2 by shipping it from Australia where it is made from coal.
    2
  15. Mostly not.
    2
  16. Exactly sir.
    2
  17. Exactly
    1
  18. Feeding hydrogen into an internal combustion engine is even less efficient than converting it back to electricity and powering an electric motor.
    1
  19. Battery busses and trucks are already there.
    1
  20. lol so what do you propose
    1
  21. Yep 😀
    1
  22.  @TheMak445  Most heavy machinery will do fine on batteries. Battery electric cranes, diggers and trucks already exist and this is just the beginning. Hydrogen will only remain a niche.
    1
  23. Yeah sure, GM going for some scam technology from the 90's.
    1
  24. He explains in the video that his house will use a ground source heat pump.
    1
  25. How do you want to make hydrogen? Natural gas steam reforming or electrolysis?
    1
  26. But it will always remain much more expensive than electricity.
    1
  27.  @TheCyberFatih  Exactly
    1
  28. Hydrogen does not generate power. It stores it.
    1
  29. The efficiency problem is impossible to solve because you can't skip laws of physics. Apart from that, fuel cell cars are a lot more complicated compared to BEVs and with the advancement of batteries there is probably zero reasons to even think about hydrogen in 10 years - let alone in 30 years.
    1
  30. It's quite rare. What do you propose instead?
    1
  31. It’s the other way around. You can make your own electricity and charge your car much easier and with only a third of the amount of energy.
    1
  32. "road legal cars are only about 20% to 35% when used to power a car" and "Engines in large diesel trucks, buses, and newer diesel cars can achieve peak efficiencies around 45%" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_efficiency
    1
  33. EVs are not considerably heavier than fuel cell cars. If you want to increase the range of a fuel cell car, you need larger tanks which results in both more weight and volume.
    1
  34. HHO generators in cars are useless and the so called improvement of efficiency is a hoax. Apart from that, this has nothing to with the subject of the video that is about FCEVs.
    1
  35. Smith Aviation Refinements yea
    1
  36. Will never happen. Fuel cells are dead for cars and definitely for small cars.
    1
  37. Sounds really cheap from a European perspective.
    1
  38.  @user-uu6bi4tn5o  The problem is longevity. They lose capacity much faster than lithium ion batteries do. Research is being done, but there is no breakthrough yet.
    1
  39.  @user-uu6bi4tn5o  Exactly. Lithium-ion is here to stay.
    1
  40. "if elon musk had entered with H2-cars so violently as he did with batteries" Lol of course not. You cannot change the hideously low efficiency. Elon knew that. Fuel cells in vehicles are dumb.
    1
  41. Paul Schubert You obviously have no clue about the capabilities of batteries and the current status of the development. If fuel cells were not dumb, all Tesla’s would have them. Elon knows physics. Barely any companies make hydrogen cars because barely anyone wants to buy them because they are so damn inefficient, expensive to drive and very complex. Also, batteries do not lose efficiency or power over time. They lose capacity. Not 70% over 10 years lol.. Tesla Model S batteries are still doing fine after 7 years. Newer batteries will last longer than the car itself. Hydrogen fuelcells wear out much faster than any battery.
    1
  42.  @paulschubert8490  "Fuel cell degradation, on the other hand, is another major problem fuel cell vehicles face. This is mainly caused by the starts/stops, acceleration/deceleration, membrane humidity variation and a high load of the engine. When the vehicle operates on various driving patterns, the fuel cell will degrade which eventually affects the fuel economy." https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360319919303234
    1
  43. Paul Schubert Exactly
    1
  44. ​ @johannesdeman411  Stationary batteries are much more simple, cheap and efficient. Weight is not an issue. Also more and more cars are currently equipped with bi-directional charging capabilities which enables you to power your house with your car battery. By the way, I am not talking about off grid situations here. Hydrogen could play a role in large scale centralised seasonal energy storage, but not for small scale day to day storage. Molten salt solar plants have proven themselves as great power generators and short term storage facilities. These are more efficient than electrolysers and fuel cells.
    1
  45. Johannes de Man a fuel cell can be 60% efficient, but an electrolyzer is about 75%. Together makes only 45% (without compression!). Charging and discharging a battery is 90% efficient. So solar + stationary battery + grid is the way to go.
    1
  46. Even if the electricity comes from fossil fuels for a large part using heat pumps still causes less CO2.
    1
  47. 1. fuel cell = electric 2. hydrogen is super inefficient and thus expensive
    1
  48.  @IrelandVonVicious  Scale does not solve the efficiency problem. Hydrogen will always remain a lot less efficient.
    1
  49.  @IrelandVonVicious  Mini vans can easily be made with electric drivetrains and plenty of range. In Europe it is rather normal to have public chargers at parkings and along the street for slow charging. You don't need a private garage or driveway to charge your car while being at home.
    1
  50.  @IrelandVonVicious  Cobalt will be a thing of the past eventually. Electrolyzers and fuel cells also require 'rare' metals like platinum and these cars also have li-ion batteries.
    1
  51.  @IrelandVonVicious  Building a lot of chargers once easily holds up against an intrinsically inefficient system. A hydrogen car is inefficient its entire lifetime. Unexpected empty batteries are a rarity as most owners will top up at night. Most drivers very rarely have to use rapid chargers for this reason and in most cases a short 10 - 15 minute charge will be plenty to get you home. Of course you are right regarding some very specific situations in which hydrogen might save you some time. But these downsides will soon not exist anymore due to the fast development of batteries and (rapid) chargers. By the time hydrogen cars (and the ecosystem) are ready for mass market adoptation it simply doesn't make sense anymore.
    1
  52. The best supercapacitors have a volumetric energy density of 88 Wh per liter. A 50 kWh car battery would therefore need 568 liters of supercapacitors.
    1
  53. Does that matter? NO
    1
  54. It uses carbon, but not more.
    1
  55. I read that using CO2 as a refrigerant is possible. But why isn't it used more often?
    1
  56.  @fritt_wastaken  Ok, so the overall efficiency of a system using CO2 is lower compared to other refrigerants?
    1
  57. Well the price of course totally depends on where you live etcetera, but CO2 emissions are lower when you use non renewable energy to power the heat pump compared to gas fired furnaces.
    1
  58. Heat pumps in the UK work just as great as anywhere else in the world with similar climates. Just because the news paper published a few articles about people that say that heat pumps are not that great does not mean that this is actually true. It all comes down to proper installation and insulation of the house (UK houses are really badly insulated due to cheap gas over the past decades).
    1
  59. No because heat pumps extract a large part of the produced heat from the environment. Even on fossil electricity total average CO2 emissions are therefore lower.
    1
  60. Lithium is not the problem. It is everywhere. Tesla just bought land in Nevada to extract it from sand. The problem with hydrogen is that is horribly inefficient so you meed loads of energy to make it. Energy that we simply do not have and will not have.
    1
  61. Than what?
    1
  62. Not really
    1
  63. It is possible, but not right now.
    1
  64. Guess where heat pumps have been popular for decades. Scandinavian countries.
    1
  65. Public chargers at parkings for overnight charging.
    1
  66. It has zero potential because burning hydrogen in a combustion engine is insanely inefficient.
    1
  67.  @gregor.potrebujes  1. Implying that mr. Lazar is a reliable source does not really add to your credibility. 2. Mileage doesn't say anything about the well to wheel efficiency of hydrogen. You need to know how much energy it took to create the hydrogen before you can say anything about efficiency.
    1
  68. gregor potrebujes Thanks
    1
  69. Exactly.
    1
  70. Exactly
    1
  71. Nope. Too complicated and batteries will soon be so cheap that nobody wants anything to do with hydrogen.
    1
  72. Common misconception. Hydrogen is and remains intrinsically inefficient and unnecessarily complex compared to battery electric.
    1
  73. Still a lot better than oil or hydrogen.
    1
  74. Does not make much sense. Diesel is relatively efficient. Hydrogen is not.
    1
  75. They are pretty good for daily energy fluctuations.
    1
  76. We first need to mine massive amounts to be able to retrieve enough by recycling. We are talking decades of mining here.
    1
  77. Nice renderings lol
    1
  78.  @radiocrash  Lithium is not polluting nor connected to unethical mining. You are probably referring to cobalt. It's a misunderstanding to think that fuel cell systems do not require any mining of 'rare' earth materials. Because they do. You cannot fix the efficiency problem by simply using insane amounts of nuclear energy. Nuclear energy is nor abundant nor free. There simply won't be a moment 'once that is cracked'. It's just physics. Batteries will always remain much more efficient and this is what counts. Efficiency means low emissions per kilometer, no matter the source of energy. Pretty much all road transportation will be battery powered. Electric trucks and busses do already exist and this is just the beginning. Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles will always remain a niche.
    1
  79.  @radiocrash  You need a lot of other materials for fuel cells and electrolysers like platinum. Mining is never completely harmless or invasive and you do not solve these problems when choosing for fuel cells. Again, fuel cells are horribly inefficient and will therefore slow down the energy transition. Efficiency is what counts to lower emissions as fast as possible. EV batteries are perfectly recyclable.
    1
  80. ​ @radiocrash  Exactly and that remains a very goog argument. The steps involved with the hydrogen ecosystem consisting of production (electrolysis), storage (compression) and conversion (in a fuel cell) can only be optimised, but never eliminated. The difference in efficiency between an EV and a fuel cell vehicle is about a factor of 3. This will never change considerably. For BMW it is just a side project and Toyota kind of missed the boat regarding EVs and tries to do something else with hydrogen. In the meantime Toyota has started planning for EV production, starting in China and then later for the rest of the world. BMW is also about to put fully electric vehicles on the market. Volkswagen has recently explained why they are focusing on fully electric vehicles in stead of hydrogen: https://www.volkswagenag.com/en/news/stories/2019/08/hydrogen-or-battery--that-is-the-question.html
    1
  81.  @radiocrash  Sure, but hydrogen is simply highly unlikely because it is so damn inefficient.
    1
  82.  @radiocrash  The article also admits it is not a viable option for passenger cars.
    1
  83.  @radiocrash  This will remain so. Fuel cell tech can never catch up with batteries due to laws of physics.
    1
  84. Exactly sir.
    1
  85. You forgot that the big advancements of batteries also include vastly improved charging times. Hydrogen is pointless already with current battery technology. Fuel cells don't grow on trees either by the way.
    1
  86. Hydrogen fuel cells in cars is a bad idea, hydrogen fuel cells in even smaller vehicles like scooters and bicycles is even worse. Just use batteries.
    1
  87. Current Model S has equal range as a Mirai. Hydrogen is over.
    1
  88. Up to the user.
    1
  89. The energy is extracted from the environment air.
    1
  90. bart h You can’t create energy out of nothing.
    1
  91. bart h Anything you stick out of the fuselage causes extra drag and thus requires more energy.
    1
  92. No dude. That is not the reason.
    1
  93. You cannot compare hydrogen production to charging efficiency. The total efficiency of a hydrogen car is only 30%. Not 70%. An EV is about 75% efficient.
    1
  94.  @kronosaurelius  Take a look at this: https://images.app.goo.gl/dGtSeJRf7ioPa7JP9
    1
  95. I don't hope so. Sweden has been a world leader of using heat pumps in homes - which is far more efficient than burning hydrogen.
    1
  96. Mandernach Luca The Tesla Semi doesn’t weigh a lot more than a conventional diesel truck in its class. Operating and maintenance costs are so much lower than diesel or H2 that the small difference in hauling capacity does not really matter.
    1
  97. Mandernach Luca Here is a nice estimation: https://www.teslarati.com/how-much-tesla-semi-truck-battery-pack-weigh/amp/ And again, range is not that important because truck drivers take breaks regularly.
    1
  98.  @honesty_-no9he  exactly
    1
  99. Interestingly, in Europe heat pumps are very popular in the (cold) Scandinavian countries.
    1
  100.  @Nabrab  That is not true. I would love to give battery and hydrogen equal changes in development. However, the hydrogen ecosystem is so hideously inefficient that precious renewable energy would be wasted to generate green hydrogen. This requires fossil power stations to compensate the wasted renewable energy and thus cause more CO2. A few companies in the Netherlands tried to receive governmental subsidies for the construction of large scale electrolyzers. Fortunately the Dutch government decided last week to decline the subsidies due to the aforementioned reason. As long as there is no abundance of renewable energy, there is no valid reason to build electrolyzers and are we better off using H2 from conventional steam reforming.
    1
  101. Doesn’t solve the efficiency problem.
    1
  102. Cas Tuyn It’s not a wrong bet. They have been testing a lot with two prototypes and the results regarding range (fully loaded) are great. Daimler is already putting electric trucks on the market and so is Mitsubishi. These trucks will be so much cheaper to run than diesel or hydrogen and that’s what transport companies want. Also they will have the smallest carbon footprint.
    1
  103. Busses and lorries are no problem on batteries. Aircraft possibly on hydrogen yes.
    1
  104.  @ivanadams5287  No. Economics of scale does not solve the intrinsically low efficiency of hydrogen cars. You cannot skip laws of physics. Batteries do not use toxic materials. Lithium is very abundant, there is more than enough. Cobalt is a bit more problematic, but future batteries will probably not contain any of this material anymore. For hydrogen cars you need (small) batteries as well plus you need to mine a lot of platinum.
    1
  105. And insanely inefficient...
    1
  106. BMW i3 with range extender was something like that (motorcycle size engine and small tank). Doesn't exist anymore because rapid development in battery technology made range extenders useless.
    1
  107. You would only need 1/3 of that amount of solar panels to charge a BEV..
    1