Youtube comments of Simon (@Simon-dm8zv).

  1. True, but many European countries have great rail networks and still have insane numbers of trucks on the road.
    247
  2. You mean 'how The Netherlands Became a Bicycle Paradise'.
    170
  3. It's a misconception to think that lithium mining will be just there to supply luxury EV manufacturers. We eventually need lithium for any type of road vehicle, including the millions of commercial vehicles that keep the world running. Even if we would manage to drastically reduce consumerism in general, which I totally agree on, we still need vehicles to transport goods and people around.
    132
  4.  @sanitygone-l9y  Are you envisioning an extremely dense network? Would be nice, but also has its problems like cutting up landscapes and neighborhoods. Or do you mean replacing existing roads by train tracks?
    110
  5. Lol this is literally the dumbest title DW used ever.
    74
  6.  @youtubeconsumer22  The fact that you were surprised that someone witnessed the end of the soviet union. It’s been only 30 years.
    74
  7.  @TyKOmain  Organic meat does not solve anything.
    53
  8.  @makr0295  Hydrogen cars will always remain horribly inefficient, no matter how much money you throw at it.
    44
  9.  @ConBroHermano  Yes, but that only needs to be done once per vehicle.
    33
  10.  @joepvdv5709  Dieren gebruiken voor voedselproductie is per definitie dierenleed.
    32
  11. Spot on
    28
  12. @wiesoweshalbwarumwozu5801 Auch ohne Subventionen macht elektrisch fahren komplett sinn.
    28
  13. Incorrect. Downsizing animal farming creates zero thread to food availability.
    27
  14. Goeie oplossing. De overheid laat zich niet intimideren door die trekkertjes. Nu snel doorpakken met het halveren van de veeteelt.
    23
  15.  @daimsaeed  The first iPohne didn't last a full day on a battery. Although Nokia phones could last a week on a charge, the iPhone still was lightyears ahead.
    23
  16. This 2.3 engine was never used in the Citroen Jumper and Peugeot Boxer vans. Only in the Ducato.
    21
  17.  @puckjansman7746  Ja klinkt echt als een fantastisch leven!
    21
  18. It will never become efficient enough. Hydrogen is a dead end road.
    20
  19. MrPugg Jij hebt nog nooit een paar leren schoenen gekocht?
    20
  20.  @WhiteWolfos  Of course you can tweak a little here and there but overall efficiency will always remain terribly low. The biogas-methane to hydrogen route is really one of the dumbest energy solutions I have ever heard of. There are so many losses in the whole process. And what are you talking about regarding cities and EVs? Public charging works perfectly fine where I live. You don’t need your own garage or driveway to charge an electric vehicle. Last thing: it is widely known Volkswagen has declared clearly they are not going to invest in hydrogen at all anymore. It’s all about battery electric now.
    20
  21. Myth
    19
  22. Model 3 is too long. Chop off 0,5 m and make it a hatchback. Done.
    18
  23. Fantastische ontwikkeling.
    18
  24.  @SaveMoneySavethePlanet  Nobody is going to invest in hydrogen factories that just sit around waiting for some excess energy.
    17
  25. Klopt. Deze hele show is een grote onzin.
    17
  26. 5:50 Het is puzzel, niet pûzel.
    16
  27.  @sanitygone-l9y  Sounds good, more rail cargo would be great.
    16
  28. Correct. In the meantime battery electric trucks are already mass produced and in use on long routes.
    16
  29. En weer een teken aan de wand dat de veehouderij zo snel mogelijk opgedoekt moet worden.
    16
  30.  @daimsaeed  Ever heard of Tesla?
    16
  31. Je bouwt geen waterstoffabriek die het grootste deel van de tijd zit te wachten op restjes stroom.
    15
  32. Dairy doesn’t belong in this age.
    15
  33.  @christianmertens9812  Very naive to think that is remotely comparable.
    14
  34.  @amh9494  I am not deciding anything. But it simply is a disgusting and polluting industry. And unnecessary too.
    14
  35. Not ironic, just a great way to spend the money.
    14
  36. I don't see the problem.
    14
  37.  @sushiginger444 it will be fine. Plenty of underground parkings with chargers around the world.
    14
  38.  @multitablez7825 electric is not on its way out
    13
  39.  @--Nath--  exactly.
    13
  40. Bjørn would approve 👍🏻
    13
  41. They are terribly inefficient and therefore not the 'true answer'.
    13
  42. Batteries are not removed for safety tests.
    13
  43. 'Heute entwickelt er Wasserstoffmotoren' hahahaha 😂😂😂
    12
  44. Yeah he wouldn’t waste his time on fool cells.
    12
  45. It is impossible to produce meat and dairy while treating animals friendly.
    12
  46. Acceleration is much better. Top speed is more than anyone needs.
    12
  47. Driving electric always makes sense.
    11
  48. Lastig he, vooruitgang.
    11
  49.  @Ghst-tl9ec  Not as relevant as you might think. Even if the EV is mainly charged with non renewable electricity the total CO2 emissions are still lower than any petrol or diesel car. The point is not whether solutions have no environmental effects at all, but whether they have LESS of an bad effect than the current sources of energy. And that is truly the case with windmills and solar panels.
    11
  50. Gelukkig is er ook nog een intelligent persoon in de comments te vinden.
    11
  51. Ik sta 100% achter het stikstofbeleid.
    11
  52. You are mixing up availability and refining capacity.
    11
  53.  @3636tango  High voltage DC connections do the job much more efficient. Shipping hydrogen around the world is terribly inefficient, incomparable to LNG for example.
    11
  54.  @samson_the_great  Dieren zijn geen eten.
    11
  55. Nope. Pollutants of EVs are far and far lower. EMF is not a concern.
    10
  56.  @akmil807  Die dieren zouden ook überhaupt niet moeten leven. Dat is het hele punt...
    10
  57.  @sabinemuller937 lol
    10
  58. Not lies. You just don’t like it.
    10
  59. Weil ein Elektroantrieb viel weniger energie braucht und viel weniger CO2 produziert.
    10
  60. What exactly are you missing from current EV battery tech?
    10
  61. Farms under threat?! You mean: nature and climate…
    10
  62. EVs are great for long distance too.
    10
  63.  @peterpaulissen2690  Elon became a bad human recently unfortunately.
    10
  64.  @MrVorpalsword  The Dutch are tall, not strong. Doesn’t have much to do with animal protein but rather with economical success and general access to proper food. Genetics also play a role.
    9
  65. Sure, cities don’t need cars. Outside the cities though…
    9
  66.  @nicholaswjamrock  Whether you like the plant based products or not, that is not really relevant. You can get used to anything if you want to. The point is that production of dairy products is simply too inefficient and polluting. Making plant based alternatives is pretty much always less polluting. Not a single adult human needs milk to survive.
    9
  67. Dus dan mag je geen kritiek op een groter systeem hebben?
    9
  68. Just because something is advanced or efficient doesn’t mean it should always be maintained. Meat and dairy production is always and everywhere inefficient and polluting.
    9
  69. Coolest VW in decades
    9
  70.  @Ronny_van_Gerwen Nobody claims it has directly something to do with racism. It is the association it creates.
    9
  71. It’s a stupid slogan. Of course we need farmers to produce the food we all eat, but livestock farming doesn’t belong in this day and age because it is devastating for animals, the planet and humans. Livestock farmers should be open to change.
    9
  72. Maar ik mag toch aannemen dat men het er over eens is dat Noord-Koreaanse invloeden niet positief zijn?
    9
  73. Trommelbremsen sind voll okay bei Elektroautos weil die hinterbremsen nicht oft richtig gebraucht werden und besser gegen Korrision geschützt sind.
    9
  74.  @yutian5884  Exactly. And famous mid century furniture pieces are currently worth A LOT more than they ever were.
    9
  75. + Elon should learn to shut his mouth
    9
  76. That doesn't mean it is more efficient energy wise. Because it obviously isn't.
    9
  77. Lol there we go again with the hydrogen stupidity. Come on guys, it is 2022. Hydrogen is over.
    8
  78. Wat een onzin. De gigantische schaalvergroting heeft plaatsgevonden gedurende de afgelopen paar decennia.
    8
  79.  @akmil807  Onzin. Alle dieren die voor voedselproductie worden ingezet worden misbruikt. Ze zouden er immers nooit vrijwillig aan meedoen. Als je denkt dat je dieren in de veehouderij een gunst verleent door ze op de wereld te zetten om vervolgens gebruik van ze te kunnen maken heb je het mis. De dieren zouden gewoon niet geboren moeten worden. Geen dieren = geen dierenleed en ook geen belasting op het milieu en klimaat.
    8
  80.  @gordonnorris4202  EVs were efficient from day 1.
    8
  81. You have no idea. Any van of this size will do about 1.8 miles per kWh. The estimated range is perfectly normal. The claimed range of the e-Transit is highly unrealistic.
    8
  82.  @amh9494  you started asking 😂
    8
  83.  @MrVorpalsword  has nothing to do with dairy and meat consumption
    8
  84. Ja het is allemaal een CoMPlOtt!11
    8
  85.  @julianbendig9050  Sehr cool!
    8
  86. There is nothing fine about slaughtering 3 billion animals a day. Cutting back is nog enough. We need a drastically different solution that fits in the 21st century in order to keep this planet liveable.
    8
  87. De veehouderij moet zo snel mogelijk worden afgeschaft.
    8
  88.  @Zadow  So what, they last a very long time (much longer than the car itself) and recycling already exists.
    8
  89. Het wappiegehalte is, zoals verwacht, weer lekker hoog in de comments.
    8
  90. 4:07 Guys, come on. It's 2023. The unit you are looking for is kilowatt-hour.
    8
  91. Inderdaad, ze moeten de veehouderij gewoon meteen opdoeken.
    8
  92.  @MrJob91  Praktijken die het milieu verpesten en dieren mishandelen en vermoorden hebben geen bestaansrecht in de 21e eeuw.
    8
  93.  @suidafrikaanseboer3320  again, I am only referring to meat and dairy.
    8
  94. En het goedkoopste.
    8
  95.  @ganondorf66 Waarschijnlijk niet. Houtstook komt vaak voor in dichtbevolkte gebieden en wordt heel laag bij de grond en compleet ongefilterd uitgestoten.
    7
  96.  @andyman8630  lol the classic ultrasonic myth is still doing the rounds apparently 😂
    7
  97.  @dalemarshall625  Less than 10% of all crude is used for petrochemical products like plastics. It’s not really the problem. Burning the rest of it is.
    7
  98. It’s not ‘farmers’ but the meat and dairy industry specifically.
    7
  99.  @acizko92 You never watched his videos apparently.
    7
  100. They work in lowering CO2 emissions drastically. The problem is they still are more expensive than petrol and diesel cars and therefore government incentives are absolutely justified. The faster we switch to EVs, the better.
    7
  101. Ok wappie
    7
  102. Ok wappie
    7
  103. We have to start somewhere. Getting meat and dairy products from farther away will eventually make them more expensive, decreasing demand. In the end other countries will follow with decreasing animal farming too.
    7
  104.  @trashpanda6965 Very unlikely as meat production involves a lot of plowing in order to produce animal feed.
    7
  105.  @danquaylesitsspeltpotatoe8307  Cost to run is much lower. That is the whole point.
    7
  106. Exactly. Demand is not the problem :D
    7
  107.  @Hironimus17 nicht vom CO2-ausstoß her.
    7
  108. Pretty much all road vehicles will be battery electric.
    7
  109. Niet als ie de stad in rijdt en aan het hijsen is. Precies wat momenteel belangrijk is om toch door te kunnen bouwen.
    7
  110. Absolutely. But it’s so sad that Elon destroyed the whole reputation.
    7
  111. Dat is toch juist niet bijzonder maar heel logisch?
    7
  112. Even if the grid is still rather carbon heavy, driving electric still makes perfect sense.
    7
  113. Different problems but probably (much) smaller problems compared to burning petroleum products.
    7
  114.  @StripeDeStripper  Nee zo werkt het niet. We hebben vooral baat bij vaccins als zo veel mogelijk mensen het nemen en niet alleen de zwakkeren. Je neemt als gezond mens immers het vaccin om verspreiding te voorkomen en niet zo zeer om het zelf niet te krijgen. Dat is het hele idee.
    7
  115.  @gilrose12345  Just because he did some dumb things recently doesn’t mean he is wrong about hydrogen. Hydrogen just does not make sense because of physics. Period.
    7
  116.  @jamesheartney9546  Correct, but for people living in cities (especially near junctions) the difference will be massive.
    7
  117.  @HansG-it4bk  falsch
    7
  118. Dairy farming on the scale it exists today also didn’t exist a century ago. Cattle is also a lot more damaging than pigs and chickens.
    7
  119.  @stevenverrall4527  Too inefficient.
    7
  120.  @peterdejong5456  Het tegenovergestelde is waar. Schaalvergroting leidt tot hoger rendement en lagere uitstoot. 40% van alle nieuw verkochte auto’s is volledig elektrisch in Nederland. En ja, er is meer dan genoeg grondstof om alle voertuigen te elektrificeren.
    7
  121. Correct. This sabotage is terrible, but I wouldn't be surprised if it is partly caused by Elon's stupidity. He just needs to shut up.
    7
  122. Hoge torentje? Alsof de politiek de prijs en producten bepaalt.
    6
  123. Misschien moet je je eerst maar eens verdiepen in werkwoordspelling.
    6
  124.  @ganondorf66  Ik citeer: ‘fijnstof, koolmonoxide, verschillende vluchtige organische stoffen en PAK Polycyclische Aromatische Koolwaterstoffen (Polycyclische Aromatische Koolwaterstoffen ).’
    6
  125.  @MrTeka500  Lol no, because it doesn’t make sense from a physics point of view. It’s stupid.
    6
  126. MrMoogle Gozer. Je caps lock.
    6
  127. Aber sie verstehen das Diesel keinen Zukunft hat oder?
    6
  128. Yes. I feel exactly the same.
    6
  129. @stan2009. Dat betekent toch niet dat je er andere mensen mee op moet zadelen?
    6
  130.  @ghz24  exactly
    6
  131. Zelfs als iedereen gezond zou leven zouden de ziekenhuisopnames nog steeds enorm zijn zonder maatregelen. Dat is juist het hele probleem van dit virus... Bovendien zou het verbeteren van ieders levensstijl en voedingspatroon een extreem traag proces zijn. Maar je hebt gelijk, een mooie aanvulling is het wel.
    6
  132.  @akmil807  Meen je dit nou? Het is niet aan ons om dierlijk bewustzijn te creëren. Wat er niet is, is er niet. Jij bent toch ook niet constant bezig kinderen op de wereld te zetten om mensengeluk te creëren? Dieren zijn er sowieso wel, ook zonder veehouderij.
    6
  133.  kainat fatima  It's not relevant how 'friendly the animals are treated'. They are still exploited and murdered in the end. No animal would choose such a life voluntarily.
    6
  134. SHDZ Waarschijnlijk een gascentrale. En ja, dat is nog steeds een stuk beter dan welke benzine- of dieselauto dan ook.
    6
  135. Oh yes you will.
    6
  136. The grid
    6
  137. Erg slim :D
    6
  138.  @MrVorpalsword  Why would I be? I am helping you understand.
    6
  139. Waar haal je die onzin vandaan?
    6
  140. Diervriendelijke zuivel en vlees bestaat per definitie niet.
    6
  141.  @homeistheearth  correct
    6
  142. According to ‘cleanairpeople’ 😂
    6
  143.  @PhreakDarkSoul  Sogar wenn immer mit Kohle- und Gasstrom geladen wird (was fast nie so ist), produziert ein E-Auto weniger CO2.
    6
  144.  @daewooparts  Still much better than fossil fuel production and combustion.
    6
  145. Verzin wat origineels man
    6
  146.  @windsolarupnorth7084  LOL where do you get that BS
    6
  147. Yea and that is exactly the problem
    6
  148.  @skrame01  EVs still win when it comes to efficiency. Making and transporting petroleum products is incredibly inefficient.
    6
  149. Niet leuk inderdaad, maar enorm nuttig voor het algemeen belang.
    6
  150.  @AndrewTSq  Emissions caused by EVs are TINY. Increase in electricity price has not much to do with EVs. Also, 700% lol!?
    6
  151. Not really. By that time all charging is in place so there is literally zero reason to get back to super inefficient hydrogen.
    6
  152. ⁠ @JaapVanderHorst  Al tientallen jaren is het inderdaad normaal dat benzine als vloeistof in de verbrandingskamer ingespoten wordt (injectie). Bij diesel overigens ook.
    6
  153.  @HansG-it4bk  Egal, Elektrisch fahren ist immer sauberer, sogar wenn Kohlenstrom genutzt wird.
    6
  154.  @HansG-it4bk  Bitte informieren sie sich ordentlich. Die 150.000 km aussage ist schon viele viele Jahren nicht mehr Aktuell.
    6
  155.  angrysoybean1012 So they go out of business in the future?
    6
  156. Kerncentrales zijn niet makkelijk.
    6
  157. Not really necessary. Nikola belongs to the Iveco Group. The vast majority of the cabover truck you see is Iveco.
    6
  158. Absolutely.
    6
  159.  @Poatan.chama.  Vliegverkeer veroorzaakt maar een fractie van de stikstofuitstoot. Landbouw veroorzaakt meer dan twee keer zoveel stikstof als alle vormen van transport samen.
    6
  160.  @mx5am945  That is very rare these days
    6
  161. Hydrogen trucks will always be far more inefficient. The vast majority of trucks will be battery electric, also the ones hauling dirt.
    6
  162. Are you stuck in 2010?
    6
  163. Kasper C. Jansen :D
    5
  164. Great work from the local government and police.
    5
  165. Ok wappie
    5
  166.  @helmetmcbaron  European countries are a massive contributor to climate change and should therefore do as much as they can to lower emissions. Pointing fingers at other parts of the world is a really weak argument.
    5
  167. Zeer verstandig van de Rabobank. Investeren doe je in projecten die toekomstbestendig zijn zoals de productie van plantaardige eiwitten voor menselijke consumptie.
    5
  168. Je kunt gewoon de accu eruit halen en de rest verkopen / laten slopen.
    5
  169. Precies. Waterstof is een bijzonder omslachtige oplossing voor het netcapaciteitprobleem.
    5
  170. Preis pro kilometer: halb so wenig als benzin.
    5
  171. Road vehicles account for about 24% of total CO2 emissions. Therefore electrification is a must and has a big impact. There is no way around it.
    5
  172. Spreek voor jezelf.
    5
  173. Just get used to it. EVs will remain heavier than fossil cars. Just like modern fossils are heavier than cars from a few decades ago.
    5
  174. Dat zegt hij toch ook niet.
    5
  175. Zo is het.
    5
  176. Hahaa :D
    5
  177. veel plezier
    5
  178.  @andrewwilson6085  obviously the point is to eat much less meat and dairy. Problem solved.
    5
  179.  @valleyhack  Great. Elon Musk is a fantastic read.
    5
  180. Vervuilende en inefficiëntie industrie bedoel je.
    5
  181. Achja, dit zijn kleine hobbels. Zoals gezegd, de toekomst is gewoon elektrisch.
    5
  182.  @buddy1155  There are currently no natural gas pipelines used to transport hydrogen in the Netherlands.
    5
  183.  @touraneindanke  Inderdaad.
    5
  184.  @akmil807  Dat bedoel ik dus, we hebben helemaal geen extra dieren nodig. En nogmaals, dieren in de veehouderij hebben nooit een gelukkig leven.
    5
  185.  @akmil807  Alle vormen van veehouderij gaan gepaard met mishandeling en moord. Als je zo graag vlees en zuivel wil eten moet je dat vooral doen, maar je moet niet denken dat je er ook maar één dier een plezier mee doet.
    5
  186.  @akmil807  Nog een keer: ook kleinschalige veehouderij gaat gepaard met het misbruiken en vermoorden van dieren.
    5
  187.  @akmil807  Dan heb je niet goed gekeken. Het kan namelijk niet.
    5
  188. Ok wappie
    5
  189.  @technologynewsplanet1782  Correct. What is your problem? Electricity is always cleaner than diesel or petrol.
    5
  190. Correct!
    5
  191. Zonder veehouders kan prima hoor.
    5
  192.  @MrVorpalsword  decreasing meat and dairy production and consumption
    5
  193.  @jec_ecart  Stop embarrassing yourself. Losses are FAR less compared to diesel or petrol.
    5
  194.  @trashpanda6965  Even grass fed meat production has terrible effects on nature and climate.
    5
  195.  @toddmarshall416  Look up class 8 truck
    5
  196.  @GuitarguyRichard56  EVs are many times less polluting.
    5
  197. Alleen omdat er in het verleden slechte keuzes zijn gemaakt betekent natuurlijk niet dat we het dan maar niet moeten doen. Het is alsnog van groot belang dat iedereen zo snel mogelijk elektrificeert, hoe lastig het soms ook is.
    5
  198. rhcpfan1992 Dan ook maar een aflevering over olieraffinages
    5
  199. Or just decrease cattle massively.
    5
  200.  @nicholaswjamrock  All these products are available in plant based alternatives.
    5
  201.  @nicholaswjamrock  The problem is that meat and dairy are by far the most inefficient ways of food production. That is why it is so important to eliminate it. Completely incomparable to rice production for example. Also: transportation emissions are only a tiny part of food production emissions. We simply know through research that plant based nutrition always causes far lower emissions, even if the food has to come from farther away, simply due to the much higher efficiency in production. Also, all the things you mentioned regarding the production of crops (land clearing , land preperation, planting, pest management , weed management, harvesting, storage, procesing, more storage, transprotaion distribution) is also involved in meat and dairy production as livestock eat plants BEFORE they are turned into meat and dairy.
    5
  202.  @noName-kn1lx  why don’t you stick to facts instead
    5
  203. Wrongggg
    5
  204. Geen veeteelt geen dierenleed.
    5
  205.  @mattersr.7542  Lol Tesla exactly reports their carbon emissions each year. Life cycle emissions of an EV are FAR lower.
    5
  206. Dat is inderdaad een uitstekend idee. Zou mooi zijn als de vlees- en zuivelindustrie ook spoedig moet gaan hervormen.
    5
  207. Weg met de veehouderij.
    5
  208. @ Yeah.. that changes exactly nothing about the fact that Elon destroyed the brand singlehandedly.
    5
  209. Ondanks alles wat je noemt is een benzine- of dieselauto vele malen meer belastend voor het milieu.
    5
  210. The world can live with A LOT less meat and dairy.
    5
  211. In China werden die meisten elektroautos verkauft.
    5
  212. It’s a fact that animal farming is one of the biggest producers of methane and nitrous oxide emissions
    5
  213. Hoogste tijd om de veehouderij op te doeken.
    5
  214. Wederom een teken aan de wand dat de veehouderij zo snel mogelijk opgedoekt moet worden.
    5
  215.  @Mr11ESSE111  Performance, range and usability are fantastic for this car. You have obviously never driven any EV. There is absolutely no reason to think there will be ‘a collapse’.
    5
  216. @ You do realize Germany is the only country where you are allowed to drive faster than 130 km?
    5
  217. @ And a lot more CO2 emissions, noise, higher cost per km and shitty driving experience!
    5
  218. Ok wappie
    5
  219.  @iii___iii  exactly
    5
  220.  @m.v.a.l7669  Fout
    5
  221.  6million Lies  Alleen al dat je denkt dat het hier om CO2 gaat bewijst dat je totaal geen idee hebt waar je over praat.
    5
  222. Elon is het allemaal zelf schuld helaas.
    5
  223.  @JDMHaze  Hydrogen is too inefficient
    5
  224. Bij lange na niet genoeg. Het 'overschot' is vooral een distributieprobleem. Gelukkig wordt er momenteel hard aan gewerkt om dit op te lossen.
    5
  225. Animal agriculture has to disappear anyway.
    5
  226. Weg met de veehouderij.
    5
  227. Well done.
    5
  228. loebkesman Ohja want in de veehouderij worden natuurlijk helemaal geen dieren mishandeld en vermoord 😂
    5
  229. De veehouderij dient zo snel mogelijk opgedoekt te worden.
    5
  230. Incorrect.
    5
  231. Our planet they are ruining.
    5
  232.  @Poatan.chama.  Akkerbouw is nodig om mensen eten te geven, veeteelt kunnen we prima missen.
    5
  233. Weg met veeboeren.
    5
  234. I am also wondering what happens to the diesel and gasoline that is then left over from plastic production?
    5
  235. It's a gradual process.. But you knew that I guess.
    5
  236.  @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
  237. Nope :(
    5
  238.  @obawaji12  Digging up batteries requires far and far less energy than making synthetic fuel for a car's life.
    5
  239.  @shaneyamaha450  Mechanical engineering. But that is not relevant, anyone with some basic understanding of physics knows this. Porsche does not pursuit efuels because it is a good idea, but because they want to continue making internal combustion engines.
    5
  240. Droge lucht warmt sneller op 😉
    5
  241. Echt stoer
    5
  242. Except that EVs are actually cleaner.
    5
  243. ⁠ @peterpaulissen2690  Elon is the negative one here. That is the problem. Elon USED to do many great things, but these times have been long gone. It’s very unfortunate, but true.
    5
  244.  @samson_the_great  Dat heet voortschrijdend inzicht.
    5
  245.  @robupsidedown  Even without renewable energy EVs are the way forward.
    5
  246.  @jandudl74  ja echt top bewijs dat CO2 verder geen kwaad kan 😂
    5
  247. Damn, speed limits for trucks are really high in the USA :o
    5
  248. Hoe vaak moet het nog gezegd worden: Het verkleinen van de veehouderij leidt niet tot voedseltekorten.
    5
  249. Well done
    4
  250. And still don’t want to this date
    4
  251. Cars are relatively short lasting products. Not worth it at all.
    4
  252. Ja want inkomen is natuurlijk belangrijker dan het milieu 😂
    4
  253. As you can see in this and many other videos EVs are very promising. And no, gasoline cars are not more efficient.
    4
  254. Hopelijk gaat een drumstick 20 euro kosten.
    4
  255. Je hebt geen flauw idee. Alles wordt gewoon elektrisch, of jij het nou leuk vindt of niet.
    4
  256. @JurgenHirschDie Strommenge ist überhaupt nicht das problem. Nur der Infrastruktur.
    4
  257. De veehouderij is verleden tijd inderdaad.
    4
  258. Een Tesla Model S komt net zo ver als een waterstofauto.
    4
  259.  @mattwaters9008  Emissions of wind and solar are far and far lower than any fossil power generation method. Nothing is completely harmless, but they are better than anything else.
    4
  260. Nah It might be a nice solution for certain situations but 99% of the time charging is much better, more convenient and cheaper.
    4
  261. Not true. Meat and dairy production is not considerably more inefficient in other countries. Also: we have to start somewhere. Eventually other countries will also start decreasing animal farming.
    4
  262. bartjuhhh Als waterstof een goed idee was geweest zouden alle Tesla’s op waterstof rijden. Elon heeft bewust voor accu’s gekozen omdat het 3 a 4 keer zo efficient is. Daarnaast: voor waterstofbrandstofcellen heb je ook edelmetalen nodig en die dingen slijten sneller dan accu’s. Het is dus gewoon een slecht idee, maar gelukkig snappen alle andere autofabrikanten dat inmiddels ook.
    4
  263. Nope. We are omnivores which means that we can thrive on both.
    4
  264.  @annettewhitt6442  then you shouldn’t use it as an argument. You just like to eat meat. Period.
    4
  265. Volledig terecht dat de gemeente waterstof uitsluit van deelname aan de aanbesteding. Rijden op elektriciteit (in accu's) is veel efficienter en bespaart dus veel CO2-uitstoot.
    4
  266. Also these will be replaced by electric bikes.
    4
  267.  @davidbrayshaw3529  Every EV makes sense. Even if charged solely on non renewable energy (which is impossible), it still is much better than any alternative. Everything on the road is going to be electric.
    4
  268. Exactly sir. Well explained.
    4
  269.  @vandeberg649 Deze valt in de categorie ‘klassiek voertuig’ en mag gewoon alle milieuzones van Nederland in.
    4
  270. In plaats van.
    4
  271. Depends on where you live. In Europe there are large amounts of affordable used EVs on the market and charging networks are great in many countries
    4
  272.  @lhamel7038  But terribly inefficient.
    4
  273. We kunnen prima zonder de veehouderij en daarmee automatisch ook een groot deel van de akkerbouw hoor.
    4
  274. In een kerncentrale wordt niks gestookt. Als je doelt op bijvoorbeeld een gascentrale, dan heb je geen gelijk. Een elektrische auto is veel efficiënter dan een met een brandstofmotor en is daardoor per definitie schoner.
    4
  275. The dairy industry is nothing to be proud of.
    4
  276. Grapjas
    4
  277. Onzin. Nederland heeft de hoogste laadpaaldichtheid ter wereld. Er staan heel veel goedkope elektrische occasions te koop en de prijs per kilometer is veel lager. Het is gewoon een kwestie van willen.
    4
  278. Yeah excellent argument. Lets keep polluting the world just because cars must make farting noises 🙄
    4
  279. Wegenbelasting voor een camper is circa 70 euro, verzekeren kun je hem voor een paar tientjes.
    4
  280.  @dietzness Je hoeft je dat anno 2024 absoluut niet meer af te vragen. Er is enorm veel LCA-onderzoek gedaan het afgelopen decennium en de conclusies kun je eenvoudig online vinden. Een elektrische auto is vele malen minder vervuilend dan een exemplaar met verbrandingsmotor.
    4
  281. Very unlikely.
    4
  282. Als we onze huidige standaard van het digitale leven (en die in de nabije toekomst) willen behouden zullen we moeten wennen aan de komst van vele datacentra. Het kan gewoon niet anders.
    4
  283. 1. For now, but the gap is closing very quickly. 2. Yes, sometimes 3. Incorrect. 4. Chargers are fine, as over a decade of charging networks in Europe proves. 5. EVs have been doing great in Nordic countries for over a decade. Extreme cold is less ideal for any vehicle, no matter the drive train. 6. No problem at all. 7. Lol! 8. Barely. A prober EV does 1000 km in less than 10 hours. 9. Same for ICE vehicles 10. Sure, but with heat pumps the effect is small. 11. So what? An ICE car burns 100x more mineral oil during its life. 12. Just a matter of time. 13. Most parking garages are fine. Maybe some older ones are not up to the tasks, but vehicles have been becoming heavier for ages anyway. 14. Not sure about this one. Source? 15. Definitely. ICE cars produce toxic fumes when they are burning AND when they are not burning 😂 16. Correct. 17. Correct, but total energy demand will decline due to higher efficiency. 18. Has always been the case. 19. Not short at all. Modern EVs have batteries that will outlive the rest of the vehicle. 20. 😂
    4
  284.  @andrea-dawn  thankfully population will decline
    4
  285.  @akmil807  Dan nog worden ze misbruikt voor voedselproductie en later vermoord.
    4
  286.  @akmil807  Jawel, want je hebt het dier ongevraagd in gevangenschap (de wei) laten leven en steelt vervolgens keer op keer de melk, eieren of wol. Daarna stuur je ze ongevraagd ver voor het einde van hun leven in zicht is naar het slachthuis. Als die dieren zich konden verzetten zouden ze nooit voor dit leven kiezen. Er is dus sprake van onvrijwilligheid en dwang, oftewel misbruik.
    4
  287. Hydrogen is too inefficient.
    4
  288. Precies.
    4
  289.  @IWontBuy-RP Alleen omdat jij denkt dat iets tegenstrijdig is, betekent het nog niet dat dit zo is. Ga je inlezen.
    4
  290.  @IWontBuy-RP  Je doet onze beroepsgroep geen eer aan.
    4
  291.  @Dubnoreix  And fast chargers…
    4
  292. Hydrogen cars are stupid
    4
  293. Weg met de veehouderij.
    4
  294.  @2MasterBuilder2  Yeah lets slaughter billions of animals a day just because it is so natural. Excellent argument dude.
    4
  295.  kainat fatima  Guess where the protein in animals comes from.
    4
  296. Niemand 😎
    4
  297. And a lot of renewables.
    4
  298. @PCisBS WAKEN De 'opwekking' van accu's is niet vervuilender dan het gebruiken van een benzine- of dieselauto. Binnen een halve ton kilometers heb je het verschil ruimschoots gecompenseerd. Juist.
    4
  299. Dat is nepnieuws. Het ligt rond de 40.000 km.
    4
  300. Nee, want elektrisch rijden is veel efficienter. Hierdoor is de CO2-uitstoot per definitie lager.
    4
  301. Veehouderij opdoeken a.u.b.
    4
  302. It will work for the vast majority of countries.
    4
  303. ​ @SADRailsim  Gelovigen gebruiken hun religie vaak als reden om doodleuk door te gaan met slechte gewoonten. Veganisten ondernemen daarentegen concreet actie.
    4
  304.  @oshima6451  Reducing meat and dairy directly results in lower GHG emissions.
    4
  305. Well, mainly anti Elon which automatically turns into anti Tesla in many people's heads.
    4
  306. Many countries in Europe offer great charging networks perfect for long distance driving. Electric is always the most efficient way, even when it has to be distributed over long distances.
    4
  307. Bitte informieren sie sich. Akkus werden ohne Probleme 10 - 15 Jahren einwandfrei funktionieren.
    4
  308. Ja. Veel minder vervuilend dan auto’s met een verbrandingsmotor.
    4
  309. 100 km per hour is a very normal speed.
    4
  310.  @MDP1702  Plus: fuel cells also degrade over time and use.
    4
  311. Those numbers are outdated. A new version of that exact research report now states ‘Based on the new and transparent data, an estimate of 61-106kg CO2-eq/kWh battery capacity was calculated for the most common type, the NMC chemistry.’ And that is already 4 years ago.
    4
  312. Stel je niet aan
    4
  313. Precies dit! Alle andere ‘oplossingen’ zijn slechts halve maatregelen of gerommel in de marge.
    4
  314. “Power to gas” wird überhaupt nicht verschwiegen. Es ist einfach unglaublich ineffizient und macht deswegen keinen Sinn.
    4
  315. Warum denkst du das?
    4
  316.  @TheMaxiM22  En er komt ook behoorlijk wat stikstofoxide uit die uitlaten.
    4
  317.  @ruudvanderzanden8013  because it destroys the world we all live on..
    4
  318.  @rostigerspieler  Nirgendwo auf basiert.
    4
  319.  @domi2875  Noch immer viele male besser als Ölprodukten verbrennen. Batterien werden natürlich recycelt. E-antrieb ist einfach die Zukunft weil es der meist effiziente Lösung ist, daran kann man nichts ändern.
    4
  320.  @Stewie..Griffin  Nein, nur 50.000 km.
    4
  321.  @caseyford3368  nice satire 😄
    4
  322. 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
  323.  @GertBoers  Waterstof is gelukkig niet inherent verbonden aan waterstof. Je kan prima de Sahara volleggen en een fatsoenlijke gelijkstroom-hoogspanningsverbinding met Europa maken. Dit zorgt voor veel minder verliezen, alleen verliest dan de huidige gasindustrie z'n bezigheidstherapie.
    4
  324.  @sanderjansen5632  De zuivel- en vleessector is direct verantwoordelijk voor de ontbossing omdat praktisch alle soja hiervoor gebruikt wordt. https://www.boerderij.nl/Home/Nieuws/2012/10/Soja-in-veevoer-geen-restproduct-1089084W/ Soja gebruikt voor veganistische producten is meestal biologisch en verantwoord geteeld. Tevens zouden we veel minder soja nodig hebben als iedereen veganistisch zou zijn omdat het gewoon veel efficiënter is om het direct in ons eigen mond te stoppen.
    4
  325. it is not
    4
  326. 7:38 bronze
    4
  327. Precies!
    4
  328.  @b127_1  De meeste warmte in warmtenetten wordt nog altijd gemaakt door het verbranden van aardgas.
    4
  329.  @Mr11ESSE111  all new cars are expensive, electric or not
    4
  330. Lol these people do not represent any of these countries at all.
    4
  331. Yes we can and no, it is not insane.
    4
  332. You thought hydrogen is not created by the same electricity?!
    4
  333.  @tejarshihardas8707  Obviously we have to minimise consumption in general, but this cannot replace the need for renewable solutions like solar and wind.
    4
  334. Mathijs precies, in de toekomst lachen we ons kapot om dat gekke waterstofidee.
    4
  335. Think about that second idea a little bit longer..
    4
  336. Battery electric busses are far cooler.
    4
  337.  @rotterdammer-  Natuurlijk snijdt het wel hout. De zorg zal uiteindelijk worden opgeschaald maar dat is vanzelfsprekend een tijdrovend proces. Natuurlijk komen er gevaccineerde mensen in het ziekenhuis. Het is algemeen bekend dat het vaccin niet 100% effectief is en dat dit na verloop van tijd verder afneemt. Daarom is een booster zo belangrijk. Zonder vaccins zou het echter nog veeeeeel drukker zijn op de IC’s en zouden we nu weer in een keiharde lockdown zitten.
    4
  338. #1 There is plenty of materials. Not a concern. Cobalt is slowly phased out. #2 Wrong. Electric vehicles are even cleaner on non renewable grid energy. #3 Easy: reuse and recycle. They are full of valuable materials.
    4
  339.  @marcdevries9202  Dat zijn dus ook consumenten die klakkeloos allerlei plastic shit aanschaffen en wegdonderen.
    4
  340.  @jamesg6071  + Volvo, Scania and Mercedes in Europe
    4
  341.  @TachyonDriver  Obviously there are plenty of less wealthy people driving a dirty vehicle not willing to shell out the 12.50 which directly results in cleaner air.
    4
  342. Er ligt al een prachtige hoogspannings DC-kabel op de zeebodem tussen Noorwegen en Nederland (NorNed) waar we dagelijks grote hoeveelheden groene stroom mee importeren. Veel efficienter dan waterstof.
    4
  343. You have no clue
    4
  344. volledig elektrisch
    4
  345. Niet de veehouders grapjas
    4
  346. Wait, is this the concept Elon talked about at Battery Day when he mentioned 'lithium mining from sand'?
    4
  347. Die Effizienz ist direkt verantwortlich für wie viel du an der Wasserstofftankstelle zählt. Mann kann es nicht vergleichen mit ICE weil öl nicht produziert wird aber einfach aufgepumpt.
    4
  348.  @dzcav3 Except that the information above has little to do with facts
    4
  349. Wrong. EVs are always cleaner, no matter the source of energy.
    4
  350.  @prem9501  "What about the coal burning, , losses during the transmission, losses during AC to DC conversion?" Like I said, even then EVs are cleaner. Petroleum products are hideously inefficient when it comes to mining, refining, transport and combustion. It is easy to beat.
    4
  351. Klopt. Maar netcongestie zorgt wel voor een lokale onbalans.
    4
  352. Hydrogen is horribly inefficient and therefore not a great solution compared to EVs.
    4
  353. Yeah some good old conspiracy theories is something this comment section still needed..
    4
  354.  @zoobrizz hybrids are no the solution
    4
  355. ok wappie
    4
  356.  @shanginadildo  I said energy efficient.
    4
  357. Omdat waterstof veel te inefficient is. Daarom.
    4
  358. Why not? It's far less polluting than a diesel or petrol car. Eco friendly does not mean that it does not pollute at all.
    4
  359. Properly designed EVs, like Teslas, don’t suffer that much from cold weather.
    4
  360.  @goldenlight1922  Nee, dat is een beroemde wappietheorie. Minder dan 10% van de sociale woningen gaat naar statushouders. Dat is dus maar een fractie van alle gebouwde woningen.
    4
  361.  @HansG-it4bk  Das weiß doch Jeder. Es beweist aber nichts. Trotz Schwenkungen im Preis und Kaufergefühl, ist und bleibt die Zukunft Elektrisch.
    4
  362. Solar, wind and batteries simply have a far lower impact. That is the whole point and pretty much everybody acknowledges that.
    4
  363. Ist egal. Elektrisch fahren ist immer besser, sogar wenn der Strom nicht immer erneuerbar ist.
    4
  364.  @jdg9184  jij blijkbaar niet
    4
  365. Nicht im Zukunft.
    4
  366. Wat betreft voertuigen zijn dat accu’s natuurlijk.
    4
  367. EVs are still the best and only way forward.
    4
  368.  @alanmay7929  Genau
    4
  369.  @Dubya-i3v  Correct.
    4
  370. Great. I hope you don't consume dairy either?
    4
  371. This van is larger than a Transit.
    4
  372. C. Wrong. Has been proven countless times.
    4
  373.  @Wendy-nm9zw  I am obviously referring to scientific research.
    4
  374.  @outofthebox5441  Hydrogen will play a role in the future but not for passenger cars. It is simply not efficient enough and will never be. I live in a densely populated city and public charging works great.
    4
  375. Literally a 1 minute Google session could have saved you a lot of embarrassment.
    4
  376.  @ubiquitous888  Exactly. In the mean time I am considering $ABML.
    4
  377.  @peterdejong5456  Elektrische auto’s zijn significant goedkoper geworden. Ik had het over voertuigen, niet over vaar- en vliegtuigen. Alle wegverkeer wordt elektrisch. Wen er maar aan.
    4
  378. Simpel, gewoon stoppen met de veehouderij.
    4
  379. Well said!
    4
  380. Guess what, we still need insane amounts of lithium for buses, trucks and delivery vans.
    4
  381. Emissions of EVs are far lower.
    4
  382. Gert-Jan Besef ook dat als de hoeveelheid veelteelt afneemt, intensieve akkerbouw ook minder wordt. 40% van de Nederlandse akkerbouw is namelijk bestemd voor veevoer. Dubbel winst 👍🏻
    4
  383. Worst of both worlds.
    4
  384. Highly exaggerated. The Golf starts at 35K Euro.
    4
  385. Exactly.
    4
  386.  @joecronin6694  Exact.
    4
  387. Stel je niet aan
    4
  388.  @bobsthea  The things you mentioned have literally zero to do with current state of things. You need to catch up.
    4
  389. How do you think the car is driving without batteries?
    4
  390.  @gregorymalchuk272  general improvement of quality of nature, climate and there of life in general.
    4
  391.  @richardkruger9838  Das ist genau der Punkt. So was wird sich nie wirtschaftlich lohnen.
    4
  392. No need to be angry about change. ‘Flex fuel’ is still very inefficient and polluting. EVs are far superior and far from toxic or dangerous. Get your facts straight.
    4
  393.  @sikkogameaholic6667  Wat snap ik niet?
    4
  394.  @djquickland8285  Veehouders moeten snappen dat het gebruiken van dieren niet meer van deze tijd is en iets anders gaan doen.
    4
  395. Nope it is not and will never be.
    4
  396.  @adrianthoroughgood1191  Well said.
    4
  397.  @yousuck7933  Plantaardig voedsel zal niet veranderen in prijs en het is de hoogste tijd dat vlees en zuivel duurder worden.
    4
  398.  @JoeBManco  you still didn’t prove that EVs aren’t ‘fit for purpose’.
    4
  399. M.V.P. Waterstofauto’s hebben hele andere problemen waarvan het belangrijkste het tergend lage rendement is. Gelukkig beseffen bijna alle autofabrikanten inmiddels ook dat rijden op waterstof een dom idee is en richten zich daarom volledig op accu’s. Accuproductie is niet zo schadelijk. Uitstoot ligt momenteel rond de 100 kg CO2 per kWh. Levensduur is tegenwoordig lang en daarna volgt hergebruik en uiteindelijk recycling. Brandstofcellen komen tevens ook niet zomaar uit de lucht vallen en slijten sneller dan accu’s. Daarnaast zijn waterstofauto’s ook voorzien van een lithium-ionaccu.
    4
  400. ⁠ @timothykeith1367  Of course waste of NG has to be drastically decreased but that doesn’t mean hydrogen cars have a reason to exist.
    4
  401. Not really as most manufacturers barely make a profit selling them. Developing battery tech and production lines is very expensive. But we are getting there. Prices have dropped a lot.
    4
  402.  @TrustInTheShepherd  Gelukkig kopen ook steeds meer mensen steeds minder vlees en zuivel 👍🏻
    3
  403. #1 current tech is fine #2 barely an issue #3 wrong #4 battery replacement is very rare #5 lol
    3
  404. Lithium availability is not a problem at all. And yes, EVs are in fact the future.
    3
  405. You are so misinformed. The ONLY reason hydrogen is so expensive is because it is so HORRIBLY inefficient. This will never change.
    3
  406. Lol it took ages for that Fiat Ducato facelift to arrive in the USA.
    3
  407.  @mrgurulittle7000  Due to the fact that they are efficient during use production emissions are compensated within a few years of driving.
    3
  408. Colin, this is not relevant. Even with fossil electricity driving electric is cleaner.
    3
  409. Dus? Het alternatief is doorgaan met fossiele energie en dan blijft er helemaal geen omgeving meer over.
    3
  410. You mean in Tokyo there are still hydrogen busses. In the meantime many countries have moved on to battery electric busses as they make much more sense and are cheaper to run. Also, using bio methane for hydrogen production is relatively nice, it is still very wasteful to use it in vehicles. The world needs vast amounts of bio methane and renewable hydrogen for industrial applications where fossil methane and hydrogen has been used for decades.
    3
  411. No they are not saying that.
    3
  412. Aaand he is back 😂
    3
  413.  @danielvilliers612  exactly
    3
  414.  @APDM_Analysis  more like 2 decades ago and 1 decade ago EVs
    3
  415. Yeah veganism is great but electric vehicles will also play a massive role.
    3
  416.  @markplott4820  I know. EVs are great. I am just saying the vast majority of vehicles doesn't last longer than 15 years so converting existing ICE vehicles is not worth it.
    3
  417. kWh
    3
  418. Het gaat om vlees en zuivel. Met akkerbouw is niets mis.
    3
  419. Arrow Knee Precies
    3
  420. Goed verwoord. Dat is inderdaad het belangrijkste aan het hele verhaal. Groene waterstof mag op de eerste plaats alleen een rol spelen bij het vervangen van grijze waterstof dat al decennia lang in de industrie gebruikt wordt voor bijvoorbeeld kunstmestproductie. Daarna kunnen we inderdaad kijken naar bijvoorbeeld andere industriele toepassingen en wellicht luchtvaart.
    3
  421. Het gaat erom dat bepaalde planten het uitstekend doen op stikstofverbindingen waardoor andere planten overwoekerd worden.
    3
  422.  @rybik7267  Dus verdwijnt er biodiversiteit.
    3
  423. Die Reichweite ist gar nicht so slecht. Mit schnelllader kan man einfach 1000 km in weniger als 11 Stunden fahren. Nordkapp ist überhaupt kein problem in elektroauto-Walhalla Norwegen.
    3
  424.  @GrafZeppelin1981  Wie gesagt, 300+ km is voll ok und kein problem auf lange Strecke met Schnelllader.
    3
  425. Already did 8 years ago
    3
  426.  @Franklin_Araujo  Definitely :D
    3
  427. Dat klinkt wel leuk, maar zo is het in de meerderheid van de gevallen natuurlijk niet. De dieren zouden niet uit vrije wil voor gevangenschap kiezen.
    3
  428. Lol how old are you 😂
    3
  429.  @overland_adventure_nz  Combustion engines are not superior and consist of far more parts. It’s over soon and that is great.
    3
  430. ⁠ @overland_adventure_nz  Wrong. EVs are far more simplistic. And no, they don’t spread ‘radiation’. You are just afraid to lose your job.
    3
  431. Even if it were true, we still need to make the switch - whether you like it or not.
    3
  432. Yes, it’s an embarrassing video.
    3
  433.  @Scooper48  They consume three times as much electricity.
    3
  434. Stop met schreeuwen en informeer je zelf.
    3
  435. Hydrogen and biofuels are terribly inefficient. Therefore battery electric is the most sensible solution to lower CO2 emissions fast.
    3
  436.  @rckc.1719  That is not relevant. Trucks aren’t there to please the eye.
    3
  437. Nope. Even without recycling EVs are far better.
    3
  438. No we do not. Hydrogen is horribly inefficient.
    3
  439.  @Hakkeholt  Veel beter inderdaad.
    3
  440. @ Im Winter gibt es oft genug Wind. Auch wird viel weniger Strom benötigt für Erdölraffination.
    3
  441.  @wernerschneider7171  Trotzdem werden sie elektrisch fahren.
    3
  442.  @Refthoom  Uitstekend verwoord Fons.
    3
  443. Alleen kunnen we ons dat niet veroorloven grapjas
    3
  444. “Soul” 😂
    3
  445.  @theo21021 How clueless can you be?
    3
  446. Yeah but on long trips you can obviously utilize 90% of the battery.
    3
  447.  @SL4PSYM4XY  Electric cars only require 1/5th of the energy that vehicles on synthetic fuel would consume.
    3
  448. Therefore legislation is so important.
    3
  449. Not even close
    3
  450.  @meckhardt2112  Correct, I did not state that nobody needs a car. Batteries are simply the most efficient and practical way to store energy so they deserve all the focus.
    3
  451.  @spacediscover8107  Goed verhaal xD
    3
  452. ‘I think’ 😂
    3
  453. Onzin. De bouw van kolencentrales is inderdaad niet leuk, maar vormt uiteraard een tijdelijke oplossing. Nergens ter wereld neemt het aandeel van energie uit zon en wind zo snel toe als in China. China wekt daardoor inmiddels meer groene stroom op dan de VS en Europa.
    3
  454.  @Snickerv12  cluelessness to the max
    3
  455. Emissions of rapid charging are indeed higher, but rapid charging doesn’t happen on a daily basis on average. Probably wouldn’t change much.
    3
  456.  @tangoymoto  😂 bitte her auf
    3
  457. 1. Would consume a lot of electricity 2. Dangerous because of high pressure 3. Would require maintenance
    3
  458. Bro where does that electricity for hydrogen production come from 😂😂
    3
  459. Source?
    3
  460.  @richardalfaro4933  it’s 20%
    3
  461. Stimmt, aber neue Wohnmobile sind generell teuer.
    3
  462.  @marcelkepa6135  Die gegevens zijn per land, niet per capita. Duitsland heeft ruim twee keer zo veel inwoners.
    3
  463. Niet relevant. Netcongestie doet zich slechts op enkele korte momenten van de dag voor. Buiten die uren kunnen EV’s prima geladen worden.
    3
  464. Zolang het veehouders zijn die gaan staken is het alleen maar positief. Dat mag zo lang mogelijk duren.
    3
  465.  @bcallahan3806  There is a lot of work being done to battery recycling already. This is an interesting watch: https://youtu.be/xLr0GStrnwQ Also: hydrogen cars will also cause waste: lithium batteries, fuel tanks, fuel cells.
    3
  466. Ezio R. Giordanelli Lopez Haha. The laws of physics always apply. No matter how ‘efficient hydrogen is’, the problem is that you need to create hydrogen first by electrolysis. The energy for the electrolysis comes from the combustion engine which has to work harder to turn the alternator. It is not possible to create energy out of nothing.
    3
  467. ‘Much better than EVs’ 😂😂😂
    3
  468. LiFePO4 scores already very good environmentally.
    3
  469. The same thing as with modern internal combustion engine cars.
    3
  470.  @davidbrayshaw3529  I didn't claim EVs only store renewables. But they do store a lot of renewables nonetheless. Actually there is a lot of wind at night. Also, many people charge at their employer during the day. This effect will grow as more EVs are sold. And obviously, bi-directional EVs are even better. And yes, we also need a lot of stationary batteries.
    3
  471. ​ @gravityskeptic8697  Lijkt er wel op inderdaad..
    3
  472. Milan Swoboda No end in sight yet
    3
  473. Because hydrogen cars are heavy already without batteries. It does not make sense.
    3
  474.  @thejammod  He is the world famous CEO…
    3
  475.  @robertmacnaughton4190  eSpresso
    3
  476. And less complex to mine and less rare
    3
  477.  @wesleydeboer4299  Precies.
    3
  478.  @opoxious1592  Grote onzin. Jij gaat nooit je Alto vullen met synthetische brandstof. Dit spul zal altijd vele malen duurder zijn dan de huidige benzine omdat het letterlijk vijf keer zoveel elektriciteit kost als een EV verbruikt om dezelfde afstand af te leggen. Het maakt natuurkundig gezien nul zin en is door het lage rendement ook veel minder effectief in het verlagen in de CO2-uitstoot. Synthetische brandstoffen zullen voorbehouden blijven voor zeer exceptionele toepassingen als luchtvaart. Niet voor wegverkeer.
    3
  479. Which is great
    3
  480. Kan prima hoor, dit is nog maar het begin. De veehouderij moet gigantisch verkleind worden.
    3
  481.  @mexhitademi3573  Omdat jij iets niet begrijpt betekent dit nog niet dat het niet waar is. Ga je eens inlezen.
    3
  482. Not at all. Hydrogen is too inefficient, especially in a combustion engine.
    3
  483. Lol
    3
  484.  @miauw8762  Dat doen we inderdaad al, en los daarvan: veehouderij is uiteindelijk wereldwijd een uitstervend fenomeen.
    3
  485. Great to see that most comments are skeptical towards hydrogen technology nowadays.
    3
  486. Compressed air is even more inefficient than hydrogen..
    3
  487.  @Apis4  Hydrogen has been around since the 70's. Nothing has really changed. A hydrogen car uses at least 3 times more energy than a BEV. You will not overcome this insane difference with some 'efficient extracting'.
    3
  488. ​ @Apis4  Of course you will not. Hydrogen extraction / production is only one part of many efficiency problems. After that there is storage, transport and eventually usage in a fuel cell - all of which are very inefficient. The whole hydrogen ecosystem will simply never get substantially more efficient - let alone more efficient than batteries. Time or development will not change simple laws of physics.
    3
  489. Lol of course not. Also with Trump the EV revolution cannot be stoppend.
    3
  490. Electric cars are far cleaner anyway, so it is an great improvement whatsoever. We do not have to wait for anything. The grid will be fine too by the way.
    3
  491.  @CordeliaWagner  exactly
    3
  492. Not relevant because guess what, for hydrogen production you need EXACTLY THE SAME electricity.
    3
  493. Every now and then an article pops up about the idea of generating electricity from small windturbines that are installed along motorways to catch the wind of the passing vehicles. I personally think that this is impossible without slightly increasing the fuel consumption of the cars that drive past them. The turbines are ‘pushed’ by the passing cars because their airflow is disturbed by the presence of the turbines, so the energy generated directly comes from the fuel tanks of the cars. Others claim that the windturbines are able to harvest the energy that would otherwise have gone to waste. Who is correct?
    3
  494. Yup. Simple physics.
    3
  495.  @stevemcgowen  having trouble finding the i on your keyboard?
    3
  496. If you forgot to charge at night, a quick stop at a fast charger is the solution.
    3
  497. Not relevant. It still is A LOT better than gasoline and diesel.
    3
  498. Exactly! This is a terribly misinformed video, which is hard to believe in 2023.
    3
  499.  @alankemp1970  Yes, it is unbelievable. Really sad to see so many people still fall for this unstoppable stream of nonsense while all the statistical and scientific facts are out there and easy to find online.
    3
  500.  @multiomer1997  MG is volledig in Chinese handen.
    3
  501. Niet voor veehouders.
    3
  502.  @larontyson  I don’t think it is a bad thing to be pessimistic about hydrogen cars.
    3
  503. Wat een onzin
    3
  504.  @PhilipBallGarry  Public chargers in the street work fine in The Netherlands.
    3
  505. Waarschijnlijk staat hij bij zijn ouders ingeschreven.
    3
  506. That’s really bad news
    3
  507. This is exactly what a hydrogen fuel cell car does. They have small batteries.
    3
  508.  @zerotwo_.002  I absolutely agree.
    3
  509.  @racevoltGamerthemecedesguy  EVs are not a hox.
    3
  510. De Nederlandse veestapel moet drastisch verkleind worden. De veetelers moeten door de staat hierbij geholpen worden.
    3
  511. You forgot about efficiency.
    3
  512. Teslas will easily last 15 years.
    3
  513. Wat is er goed aan?
    3
  514.  @vpnconsult  Aan alles komt een eind. Veehouders hadden allang eens kritisch kunnen nadenken of hun bedrijfsactiviteiten nog thuishoren in deze tijd. Bovendien krijgen ze een grote zak geld van de overheid in het geval van uitkopen.
    3
  515.  @wearegeek  Een waterstofinstallatie is hoe dan ook duur en als hij niet groot genoeg is dan heeft het weinig zin. Het is een elektrolyzer + compressoren + opslagtanks + allerlei regelsystemen + brandstofcel om het allemaal weer in elektriciteit om te zetten.
    3
  516. The push for hydrogen vehicles only is one of the last spasms of the fossil industry.
    3
  517. Jan Hogerwerf Nee, dat veroorzaakt minder uitstoot omdat elektrische auto’s zo efficient zijn.
    3
  518. And adds to the energy required to accelerate…
    3
  519.  @petelattimer6808  Seems to be a very rare scenario. Most campervans don't ever get into any real wilderness. Last resort would be solar panels. Fast chargers will be all over the place by the way, just like gas stations are now.
    3
  520. ⁠​⁠​⁠ @owenboyd5674  EV is by far the most efficient solution. Synthetic fuels are a terrible way to power a passenger car and will never play any significant role. So yes, focussing on EV is in fact totally justified.
    3
  521. It is not because batteries are already far more effective in lowering CO2 emissions.
    3
  522. Because the EU understands the environmental effects of meat and dairy production. Other parts of the world will follow later.
    3
  523. Yes it is. Electric car fires are very rare.
    3
  524.  @ale_idsardi1615  Dat de veehouderij weg moet. Duidelijk toch?
    3
  525.  @imnotusingmyrealname4566  Until they start regenerating. Euro 7 will be the nail on the coffin for most internal combustion engine cars.
    3
  526.  @volvosjafur  Hij heeft wel gelijk.
    3
  527. @Pickopen Forever420 That’s only a fraction of the oil required to power combustion cars.
    3
  528. Watch till the end.
    3
  529.  @PrinceOfSilla  Correct. LFP is great.
    3
  530. Well said.
    3
  531. @Claire H Hydrogen I doubt there is a considerable difference in recyclability. The EV has a large battery pack, motor controller and an electric motor and the fuel cell car has a small battery pack, several fuel tanks, a fuel cell, a motor controller and an electric motor. All of these components have their challenges when it comes to recycling.
    3
  532. 4 years *
    3
  533. Weg met de veehouderij.
    3
  534. Hé een wappie
    3
  535. Unmöglich.
    3
  536. @Mark Jacobs De stikstofuitstoot heeft vooral met veehouderij te maken. De akkerbouw is prima in staat om Nederland te voeden.
    3
  537.  @nvelsen1975 Perfect verwoord.
    3
  538. Das weißt doch Jeder. Der Punkt ist das es ein Elektrofahrzeug ist. Und dann ist es schon beeindruckend.
    3
  539.  @donaldduck5700  Ein Elektrobus mit 300+ km Reichweite war vor weniger Jahre absolut undenkbar.
    3
  540. Incorrect.
    3
  541.  @bowel_movement  Goed verwoord.
    3
  542.  @PizzaLov3r  Read my comment again.
    3
  543. 👍🏻
    3
  544. Goed idee. Dan zullen we ons namelijk allemaal realiseren dat we helemaal geen vlees en zuivel nodig hebben.
    3
  545. vervangT
    3
  546.  @dalujo  Uitstekend verwoord. Vlees en zuivel hebben niks te zoeken in de 21e eeuw.
    3
  547. There is no need to wait on the grid to improve. Grid reinforcement and EV adoption can happen simultaneously.
    3
  548. Precies dit. 👍🏻
    3
  549.  @BigBen621 exactly.
    3
  550.  @BlakeB415  I was talking about Teslas indeed. Like I said, a 15 minute charge is nothing on a long trip. You would normally probably take a longer break anyway. And again: in daily life you actually save lots of time opposed to refueling because charging happens when you sleep. Please provide a source for the diesel generator story, never heard of that before. Driving electric is always the cleanest option, even on carbon heavy electricity. Hydrogen rarely comes near that level because it is so damn inefficient. 90%+ recycling of lithium batteries is absolutely no problem. Look up Redwood Materials and American Manganese.
    3
  551. Onbekende Nederlander Je kan prima een gebruikte wagen van Markplaats halen en super goedkoop rijden.
    3
  552.  @anchormax3597  The goal is to lower emissions. Nothing else.
    3
  553.  @sam-zf7xd 🤦🏻‍♂️
    3
  554.  @MrR5000  Electric cars are very popular in Northern countries.
    3
  555.  @tiamaria2241  Niet relevant. Geen enkel dier zou voor een leven in de veehouderij kiezen.
    3
  556. Akkerbouwers ja, maar de veehouderij hoeft echt niet mest rust gelaten te worden.
    3
  557.  @hairybutharmless7163  I absolutely agree. I live in a walkable city myself. Still I think we need a lot of vehicles that require battery power trains including trucks, vans, taxis, buses to keep a society like that running.
    3
  558. Elektroautos sind nicht weniger Zuverlässig.
    3
  559. Hydrogen is not abundant. It is almost always attached to another element and it takes a lot of energy to separate it.
    3
  560. JDN Rotterdam Hybride is een al lang gepasseerd station.
    3
  561.  @Hkchinese888  Obviously the vehicles need to go through a registration and inspection after conversion.
    3
  562.  @alexterrell1062  Fast chargers are everywhere.
    3
  563.  @alexterrell1062  You were referring to long trips yourself. And yes, even supermarkets often offer DC charging. But apart from that, destination chargers don't have to be DC. The whole point of a destination is that you will be spending enough time there to charge with AC.
    3
  564.  @spekvet Nee, deze is ouder dan 50 jaar.
    3
  565. He is probably referring to the current generation Transit that has been in production since 2013 in Europe and 2015 in North America.
    3
  566. Yup. But actually hydrogen cars are already obsolete.
    3
  567. A far bigger problem is the complete lack of efficiency.
    3
  568. Of course. Electric motors are typically much stronger than engines.
    3
  569. But not for long
    3
  570. Did you actually check your numbers before writing this? The area of land used for flowers is TINY compared to land used for other applications like vegetables and animal feed.
    3
  571. Lol the USA is finally banning incandescent lights in 2023 😂
    3
  572. There is A LOT of lithium. Batteries are reused and eventually recycled. We won’t be running out of electrons either by the way..
    3
  573. D Reardon They didn’t factor in the impact of platinum mining (for the fuel cells) either.
    3
  574.  @TheMrReee  That is true. But hydrogen cars are so horribly inefficient that it probably won't change the total outcome much.
    3
  575. ForsakenGuy Het is sowieso de groenste oplossing. Waterstof is alleen maar verspilling.
    3
  576.  @MosheBenChaim  Lol lees je eens in. En nee, een artikeltje in De Telegraaf telt niet.
    3
  577.  @Neojhun  Oh lol that is hilarious.
    3
  578.  @SirDella  Well high end EVs are already capable of an equal range and fast charging is often only a matter of half an hour. Hydrogen will always remain much more expensive but the differences between BEV and HFCV are getting smaller and smaller.
    3
  579. Easily compensated for when you start driving.
    3
  580. You forgot that hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are mindbogglingly inefficient and also require precious materials. It doesn't solve anything.
    3
  581. Fully electric is the only sensible solution. Hybrid is the worst of both worlds.
    3
  582.  @matthewmarkus2495  2) it’s called AC charging 3) Not at all. Every EV counts and contributes. 4) again, modern ICE can be ‘hacked’ or ‘turned off remotely’ in exact the same way. Has nothing to do with the technology that turns the wheels.
    3
  583. Yes 😎
    3
  584. Not the majority, but a large part indeed. Comparable to transport emissions. We need to do both: get rid of factory farming AND stop burning fossil fuels.
    3
  585. Most trucks will be battery electric in the future anyway.
    3
  586. Fout. De veehouderij is verantwoordelijk voor 40% van de stikstofuitstoot. Verkeer, vliegtuigen en industrie samen maar 20 procent.
    3
  587. Nobody claims that EVs do not create waste. It’s about emissions.
    3
  588. Charging an EV takes only 20 minutes at a fast charger. Hydrogen fuel cells are made of finite resources and fuel cells in general have a short life (shorter than a battery).
    3
  589.  @kalvds9345  Although small improvements are definitely possible, hydrogen cars will always remain very inefficient due to simple laws of physics. The Volvo report is far off. More recent reports prove that an EV only needs 30.000 km to compensate for its production emissions compared to an equally sized ICE car. This number will go down in the coming years. A hydrogen car is inefficient from day one and remains that way its entire life.
    3
  590. Zonder veeteelt geen dierenleed.
    3
  591. Not at all. Even at 22% solar makes perfect sense as we all know.
    3
  592. Niet voor te stellen he?
    3
  593.  @hersonmartinus7056  Dat is geen probleem hoor. Vlees en zuivel zijn per definitie inefficient omdat je er vele malen meer plantaardig materiaal voor nodig hebt dan wanneer je het gewoon direct in je mond stopt.
    3
  594.  @hersonmartinus7056  Dat hoeft ook niet. Vrijgekomen land kan immers gebruikt worden om andere gewassen te verbouwen.
    3
  595.  @ytuuuidvb6181  not at all
    3
  596. Wat een onzin. Kolenstroom bestaat bijna niet meer. 50% van de Nederlandse stroom is hernieuwbaar. Bovendien staan centrales buiten de stad.
    3
  597.  @shake6321  Exactly sir.
    3
  598.  @NyanyiC  Vegetables are full of B vitamins, except for B12.
    3
  599. Haha
    3
  600.  @Stormtrooper_Accuracy  I can imagine, but it is just a matter of time.
    3
  601. lol! One of the worst explanations for why hydrogen is not taking of 'yet' I have seen so far. Quite creative though..
    3
  602.  @mazirius11  We could indeed use hydrogen for surplus storage (if there is anything left anyway), but that does not mean we should put it in cars. It is more efficient to store and convert the hydrogen at centralized plants and then distribute the electricity over the grid when needed for anything we like.
    3
  603. ​ @mazirius11  The majority of charging moments are low power (for example overnight AC charging). Most EV drivers only use fast DC chargers occasionally and need about 10 kWh per day for normal commuting. These are rather low numbers and do not really form a thread to the grid in general. High power DC chargers do indeed require a more heavy duty grid connection, but this is manageable because they are not located all over the place.
    3
  604. Zijn het ook.
    3
  605. “Self running generators” 😂
    3
  606. There is.
    3
  607. It is not true. It is a scam.
    3
  608. lol where did you get these idiotic numbers and information
    3
  609. Yeah semi liquid. It’s a paste.
    3
  610. Fendt en case power Wordt er niet echt origineler van
    3
  611. Nope. EVs last longer than ICE cars.
    3
  612. Echt he, er duidelijk zijn meerdere blikken wappietrollen opengetrokken.
    3
  613. At the same time China is expanding wind and solar like no other country.
    3
  614. Eufor Here Het is niet relevant hoeveel insecten of andere dieren sterven bij het verbouwen van groente. Onder aan de streep is het natuurlijk altijd minder dan wanneer je wel vlees en zuivel consumeert aangezien je grote hoeveelheden planten nodig hebt om vlees en zuivel te maken.
    3
  615. Vegan Soldier Precies ;)
    3
  616. Eufor Here Fout. Het gaat er niet om of de dieren ‘bijproducten’ of speciale gewassen eten. Het gaat erom dat je altijd veel meer planten nodig hebt om vlees en zuivel te maken dan wanneer je gewoon direct planten in je mond stopt. Verder ben je blijkbaar ook vergeten dat ruim 60% van de Nederlandse akkerbouw bestemd is voor veevoer...
    3
  617. Eufor Here Wat betreft de rattenplaag... ooit gehoord van whataboutism? Het is niet relevant.
    3
  618. Literally nobody claims otherwise. Everyone knows this. The point is that DESPITE that fact an EV is still a lot less polluting.
    3
  619.  @bealestreator8940  Yes, it is interesting technology. However, another downside apart from the increase in unsprung weight is the vulnerability of the motors and also of the high voltage cables that lead from the motor controller to the motors.
    3
  620.  @robertdownes793  Your statements are simply incorrect. Coal comsumption might have increased somewhat, but not significantly. Also natural gas is a lot cheaper again today. But if electricity would have been generated mainly by coal (which is not the case) EVs would still be less polluting than internal combustion engine cars. Also, solar and wind have been doing VERY well over the past few years in several European countries.
    3
  621. Very inefficient.
    3
  622. Sheeeet
    3
  623.  @penskepc2374  You are simply wrong. Combustion engines are over. And no, efficiency will not improve significantly anymore. It's just physics. Here in Europe the sales of new ICE cars will be forbidden from 2030 and that's a great thing.
    3
  624. @Chernobyl, ga je eerst eens fatsoenlijk inlezen voordat je wat roept.
    3
  625.  @april.2332  Alles behalve dierlijke producten natuurlijk.
    3
  626. Exactly sir.
    3
  627. Well the cars remain great but Elon is obviously a good reason not to buy them.
    3
  628. Tesla designs their batteries for 1500 cycles, which results in 300k to 500k miles.
    3
  629.  @dean1100110  ICE vehicles are and remain expensive because of their complexity and their exhaust gas treatment systems. EVs will (and are) getting cheaper because of scaling of battery production. We can already see the effect happening right now. And no, there is no slave labour involved with the mining of lithium. Nor is lithium mined in Congo. You are probably referring to cobalt, a material that is used less and less in EV batteries and there are already plenty of EVs on the road that use 0 cobalt. And again, this is not the time for energy squandering as we need to reach climate goals.
    3
  630. Great to hear. Hopefully this motivates others.
    3
  631. @Tim Bosveld Stikstof is een lokaal probleem dat zich op meerdere plekken in de wereld voordoet. In Nederland is het echter extra erg omdat we zo enorm veel veeteelt hebben.
    3
  632. Bitfreakie Precies 😂
    3
  633. TrendingTuber Accu’s zijn niet echt chemische rommel en elektrische auto’s vliegen maar zelden in de fik vergeleken met auto’s met een benzinemotor. Ze zijn wel wat moeilijker te blussen, dat klopt. Maar dat is natuurlijk geen argument om maar te stoppen met elektrische auto’s 😂
    3
  634. CrazieBlacks Accu’s worden eerst hergebruikt en uiteindelijk gerecycled, ze zitten immers vol waardevolle materialen. Er is overigens niks mis met ‘chemische processen’. Over 10 jaar zullen bijna alle nieuw verkochte auto’s elektrisch zijn. 👍🏻 De verkoop van benzine- en dieselauto’s zal tegen die tijd waarschijnlijk verboden zijn. 😃
    3
  635. Elektrisch Fernverkehr ist jetzt schon möglich.
    3
  636. Uiteindelijk moet je wel.
    3
  637. Elektroautos sind fahrende Stromspeicher.
    3
  638. Kom maar door met je alternatief
    3
  639.  @hankitytankity  I can only speak for Europe, but the infrastructure is great already here. I think it takes far less than 20 years for the USA to catch up.
    3
  640. ok wappie
    3
  641.  @tomassteenman2100  Lithium raakt niet snel op en is prima te recyclen. Bovendien komen elektrolysers en brandstofcellen ook niet zomaar uit de lucht vallen. Je hebt daarvoor platinum of andere edelmetalen nodig. Tevens zijn deze apparaten, net als accu's, aan slijtage onderhevig.
    3
  642. 😂 If there is someone who didn’t do his homework it is mr. Meyer himself.
    3
  643. You have no clue Susan. Environmental impact of wind energy is nothing compared fossil alternatives.
    3
  644.  @tdevry  windturbines zijn verantwoordelijk voor een groot gedeelte van de duurzame opwek. Enorm nuttig dus.
    3
  645.  @wramerdammilot8766  De kans dat je als gezond mens doodgaat aan corona is echter vele malen groter. Bovendien heb je altijd kans op hartontstekingen en trombose, alleen wordt die kans met het vaccin een minuscuul klein beetje groter.
    3
  646.  @StripeDeStripper  Klassieke fout. Je vergeet dat de groep gevaccineerden veeeel groter is.
    3
  647. braunblender Distribution to businesses and homes is unnecessary because power distribution through high voltage power lines is much more efficient. And so are electrical appliances at home (heat pumps and induction cook tops).
    3
  648. Daan circa 250 km
    3
  649. Zo is t!
    3
  650. lithium is not rare at all.
    3
  651. Other EVs can use Superchargers too, although not as cheap.
    3
  652.  @faithfullytuned  Thanks, good to know. I am, indeed, more familiar with the situation in Mainland Europe.
    3
  653. That allow people to do what?!
    3
  654. In de video wordt verteld dat het huis gesloopt zal worden.
    3
  655. You forgot that legacy auto is taking massive losses on every EV sold.
    3
  656.  @wswwsearch  ‘For the 2023 calendar year, GM EV sales grew 93 percent to 75,386 deliveries.’
    3
  657.  @rotterdammer-  Gezonde mensen laten zich niet vaccineren voor zichzelf, dat begrijp je nu toch intussen wel? Het gaat om het tegengaan van algemene verspreiding en de druk op de zorg.
    3
  658. Precies - iedereen maar zeiken over biomassacentrales maar dan wel vrolijk hier aan mee doen.
    3
  659. Waterstof is een gepasseerd station, dat weten ook de autobouweres zoals Volkswagen inmiddels en richten zich daarom op accu-auto's. Omdat jij denkt dat accu's slecht zijn voor het milieu betekent het nog niet dat dit ook zo is. Lees je een beetje in.
    3
  660. Unmöglich. Elektroantrieb verursacht immer weniger CO2.
    3
  661.  @LuchtkunstenaarNL  Belabberd rendement, duur, lastig te transporteren en op te slaan, tanks nemen enorm veel ruimte in in de auto, range is vergelijkbaar met moderne EV’s.
    3
  662. Inefficient.
    3
  663. A heat recovery system is what you are looking for. These have been around for quite a while.
    3
  664.  @gvdschoot Jij wil zeggen dat de kleur van een zonnepaneeltje belangrijker is dan de energietransitie?
    3
  665. De stad is er door de jaren heen een stuk beter en mooier op geworden. Bedankt Lot.
    3
  666. It’s quite terrible for cars. Very inefficient.
    3
  667. Weg met de veehouderij.
    3
  668. Exactly. People still mumbling about hydrogen in 2023 🤦🏻‍♂️
    3
  669.  @AndrewTSq  Of course it does. But that doesn’t change my statement. $0,3 dollar per kWh is a pretty decent price and barely more expensive than it was before the Russian invasion.
    3
  670. Well it is a PHEV so it has a damn internal combustion engine in it. Maintenance will be closer to a regular car.
    3
  671.  @pancakes3250  Yeah, pretty much all road vehicles will be battery powered. Electric busses and trucks already exist.
    3
  672. Ligt er maar net aan waar je het voor wil gebruiken. Voor voertuigen en verwarming is het een zeer inefficiente oplossing. Voor de productie van kunstmest is het onmisbaar en bij het verduurzamen van staalproductie is het waarschijnlijk een goed idee.
    3
  673. Natural gas price has been back to pre-war levels for over a year…
    3
  674. If there is an exceptional amount of wind, you just crank up charging speeds of EV chargers. Much easier and already exists.
    3
  675. EVs will easily outlast hydrogen fuel cell cars.
    3
  676.  @farishanafiah8461  Those numbers are based on nothing. EV batteries easily last 10+ years. In the meantime a fuel cell only lasts 200.000 miles.
    3
  677. Allemaal niet relevant. Onder aan de streep is hernieuwbare energie veel schoner dan fossiele alternatieven. Niemand beweert dat er helemaal geen CO2-emissie mee gepaard gaat. Het is gewoon relatief gezien veel beter.
    3
  678. De veehouderij opdoeken a.u.b.
    3
  679. Kijk, dit is nou een verstandige boer. Akkerbouw is een veel betere bedrijfsactiviteit 👍🏻
    3
  680. Exactly
    3
  681.  @quillo2747  Incorrect. Animal products are far worse, even in case of grass fed.
    3
  682. 100% steun voor het stikstofbeleid
    3
  683.  @hOtneO  You don’t know how much energy it costs to actually get the hydrogen?! Idiot!
    3
  684. Het gaat om veehouders, niet om boeren in het algemeen. Niets mis met akkerbouwers.
    3
  685. Wasserstof in einem Verbrenner benutzen is sogar unrealistischer als verwendung in einem Brenstoffzelle. Deswegen ist es klar das ein Brennstoffzellefahrzeug gemeint ist.
    3
  686. not at all
    3
  687. Nee, jij vindt het gewoon niet leuk. Dat is wat anders dan ‘het klopt niet’.
    3
  688. Gast heb je wel eens op marktplaats gekeken? Er staan meer dan 10.000 elektrische occasions te koop.
    3
  689. Elektroantrieb verursacht trotzdem viel weniger CO2.
    3
  690.  @mark.85.  Waar heb ik het over natuur? Veehouderij is gewoon extreem vervuilend en een enorm inefficiënte manier om voedsel te produceren. Het hoort niet in deze tijd thuis. Zuivel en vlees is inherent aan het uitbuiten en vermoorden van dieren, daar verandert een leuk filmpje niks aan.
    3
  691.  @johank1061  Je bent in de war met koolstofdioxide.
    3
  692. Even on non renewable energy driving electric is the cleanest solution.
    3
  693.  @KarenCro  As we all know by now, scientific research has proven that a plant based diet is possible and healthy if carried out correctly. Also: buying plant based products is not more expensive (in fact, almost always cheaper) and does not require to 'make things from scratch'. What makes you think so?
    3
  694. You won't need to. EV batteries last longer than the vehicle itself.
    3
  695. Why?
    3
  696. Not really. Hydrogen is a horribly inefficient way to store electric energy. Nuclear power requires mining too and the waste management is obviously another big downside.
    3
  697. Lol
    3
  698. You sir are correct.
    3
  699.  @1968Christiaan exactly.
    3
  700. Yeah Redwood Materials sounds quite promising. But first we need a few decades of intense mining to produce these products (that later will be recycled) in the first place.
    3
  701.  @JohnBoen  Okay that would be great. I hope so! Yeah, I heard Elon talk about nickel shortages too.
    3
  702. Dat boeit niet. Elektrische voertuigen zijn per definitie efficiënter.
    3
  703. lol. If something literally requires 3 times more energy in the first place it can never be a cheaper option.
    3
  704. The camera mirros are obviously there for aerodynamic reasons.
    3
  705.  @shanginadildo  EVs were very energy efficient from day one.
    3
  706.  @shanginadildo  That it uses relatively small amounts of energy per kilometer. This has always been the case, unlike hydrogen cars.
    3
  707. Weg met de veehouderij.
    3
  708.  @tweakyt4918  Wat dacht je van milieuvervuiling en dierenleed?
    3
  709.  @Waterdiver3900  Het feit dat je meteen over vaccinaties begint terwijl we het over veehouderij hebben zegt al genoeg.
    3
  710.  @Waterdiver3900  En wat heeft dat te maken met veehouderij en vaccinaties?
    3
  711. Soms. Meestal een mix van veel wind, zon, een beetje biomassa een beetje gas. Veel beter dan diesel 👍🏻
    3
  712. Correct
    3
  713. so true
    3
  714. Falsch. Das is überhaupt nicht egal. Strom verursacht immer weniger CO2 als Diesel.
    3
  715. Busses do fine on batteries.
    3
  716. To name a few: cheaper per mile, cheaper to maintain, far more comfortable to drive, far lower CO2 emissions.
    3
  717. Rosie did not claim oil will go away anytime soon. The most important thing is to stop combusting oil as soon as we can. Petrochemical products only make up less than 10% of a barrel of oil and as long as these products are not burned, no significant emissions are caused.
    3
  718. Yes it is a lot slower, but you can obviously still cover a few hundred miles a day.
    3
  719. The alternative is undersea oil drilling..
    3
  720. Uiteraard oneens. Veeteelt moet zo snel mogelijk verboden worden.
    3
  721. Mark v Geen moeite en oververhitting. De accu zal echter wel snel leeg gaan.
    3
  722.  @Poatan.chama.  Vlees is een luxeproduct, we hebben het totaal niet nodig. Omdat sommige mensen hun geld verdienen met dierenmishandeling en milieuvervuiling betekent nog niet dat we er dan maar gewoon mee door moeten gaan. De overheid heeft geld beschikbaar gesteld voor bedrijven die willen stoppen.
    3
  723.  @Poatan.chama.  Vlees is compleet onnodig in de 21e eeuw. Nogmaals, de impact van vliegtuigen is veel lager. Je argument snijdt dus geen hout.
    3
  724. Thumbnail is incorrect.
    3
  725.  @MBarberfan4life  EVs are the future.
    3
  726. ja.
    3
  727. Ok wappie
    3
  728.  @Nachtwolke  sehr gut gesagt
    3
  729. Veehouders kunnen we prima missen.
    3
  730. You will have no choice in the future, but I am sure you will love it eventually.
    3
  731.  @TheDirtyBirchTrails  Ah alright. So that has nothing to do with on-board hydrogen production. Anyway, the point with hydrogen combustion in engines is that it is even more inefficient than conversion in a fuel cell..
    3
  732.  @jacquelinevanderkooij4301  Dat weet ik ook wel. Een accu kun je veel (2 tot 3x) efficienter opladen dan een tank met waterstof creëren. Waterstof is immers ook geen bron van energie.
    3
  733. Where did you get this information? It’s quite the opposite. Charging EVs overnight actually stabilizes the grid.
    3
  734. Het gaat er niet om hoe de dieren behandeld worden, maar dat de dieren überhaupt gebruikt worden. Dat los je dus niet op door de prijs wat te verhogen. Mensen moeten gewoon geen vlees en zuivel meer kopen. Dat is de enige oplossing.
    3
  735. Batteries may lose some capacity after lots of kilometers and years, but fuel cells are insanely inefficient from day 1.
    3
  736. That's just the American way of reporting. The thing is simply that Norway is doing a great job in making the world a better place.
    3
  737.  @MrLihogames  De aflevering van Tegenlicht was helaas een compleet kritiekloos propagandaverhaaltje waarbij alleen lobbyisten uit de gasindustrie en politici die zich er nooit echt in verdiept hadden aan het woord kwamen.
    3
  738. Sure, but that accounts for a MUCH smaller part of the crude consumption.
    3
  739. So what is the Y doing in the word Hyundai.
    3
  740. Veehouderij opdoeken a.u.b.
    3
  741.  @diesel1able  Hydrogen cars ar over already. Toyota and BMW are also focussing on battery electric cars, hydrogen is just a little hobby on the side that will soon be pushed off the cliff. Tesla's battery technology already allows for better range than hydrogen.
    3
  742. Fantastisch. Elektrificatie = 👍🏻
    3
  743.  @simson4t Yes, but it will always remain cumbersome.
    3
  744. Yeah. Terribly inefficient.
    3
  745. Same in NL
    3
  746. It's a famous myth. "You convert water in your fuel tank to hydrogen" - so where do you get the energy from for that conversion?
    3
  747. The other way around
    3
  748.  @NickPilmeyer  Precies.
    3
  749.  @martinerozeboom9636  Inderdaad. Weg met vlees en zuivel.
    3
  750.  @martinerozeboom9636  ‘Verantwoord’ vlees en zuivel bestaat niet.
    3
  751.  @MrAerohank  Zeker weten. Zo snel mogelijk.
    3
  752.  @robsengahay5614  Could be useful for seasonal storage in the future, not for driving.
    3
  753. In 2015 blijven hangen?
    3
  754. LOL
    3
  755. Ganz genau.
    3
  756. But it will always remain a factor 3 more expensive than electricity.
    3
  757. Have a look in a slaughterhouse. Pretty disgusting.
    3
  758. Weil?
    3
  759.  @anonsenitl  Du warst seit 2010 nicht mehr draußen?
    3
  760. It is not
    3
  761. @ Geen effect? Het gaat om ruim een kwart. Vanzelfsprekend moeten alle andere andere vormen van transport ook naar 0 CO2-uitstoot. Maar dan veelal met andere methoden.
    3
  762. Hydrogen cars have batteries.
    3
  763.  @Nicky_Spraakwater is geen onzin
    3
  764. Nein, wird es nie.
    3
  765.  @DP-zz8be  genau
    3
  766. It’s okay for a temporary solution, but obviously not suitable as a long term solution.
    3
  767. Of course emission requirements will end things like V8 engines and soon after pretty much any internal combustion engine. Electric drivetrains are the only way to lower CO2 emissions fast enough.
    3
  768. Meat and dairy is not vital at all. And no, overpopulation is not the problem.
    3
  769. fool's cells
    3
  770. You would need insane numbers of solar panels to produce enough hydrogen.
    3
  771. Zolang dit er aan bijdraagt dat meer veehouders stoppen zie ik alleen maar voordelen.
    3
  772. Als je honderden kilometers achter iemand aan moet racen dan wordt het misschien lastig - mits de verdachte een volle tank had - maar dat komt natuurlijk nooit voor. De auto in het filmpje heeft een actieradius van zo’n 350 km dus dat lijkt me geen probleem.
    3
  773. Yes. That's normal in the USA.
    3
  774.  @BlackOpsInvesting  100%
    3
  775.  @chriscalderin6677  wrong
    3
  776. We hebben er ook allemaal baat bij lol
    3
  777. Not at all. Wind and solar are very complementary. We need both.
    3
  778. Because pollution from diesel production and combustion is far and far worse.
    3
  779.  @abirnigam8816  Don’t worry, we’ve been past this ‘argument’ for many years already. Almost a decade of cumulative research is available that proves EVs are the least polluting option.
    3
  780. Uitstekend idee. Het is de hoogste tijd om zo snel mogelijk van het gas af te gaan.
    3
  781.  @ComeJesusChrist  Yes, exactly that. Despite all these things EVs STILL produce less CO2 and other emissions during their live. ICE cars are simply that inefficient.
    3
  782.  @ComeJesusChrist  It is clear you are not interested in facts. There are plenty of peer reviewed research reports easy to find that compare life cycle emissions of EVs and combustion engine cars. This subject has been extensively covered for years. It is not necessary to keep relying on personal assumptions, all the data is out there.
    3
  783.  @Damian-huismann  omdat er alleen maar dommigheid geschreven staat haha
    3
  784.  @Damian-huismann  😄
    3
  785. Natural gas prices are low again…
    3
  786. Artilleriemunitie. Zonder spatie dus.
    3
  787. 1. You can't store hydrogen when your tanks are full either. 2. Battery electric cars are perfect for grid stability and allow for variable charging power to accomodate peak shaving. 3. Burning HHO in an internal combustion engine is an insane waste of energy and dumb. Won't happen.
    3
  788. Nope. Hydrogen cars are inefficient by nature. This will always remain so.
    3
  789.  @OldManBadly  Nope. It is in fact very simple. The losses in the production and distribution of diesel and petrol are so insane that electric always wins.
    3
  790. You would need a big battery for that xD
    3
  791. Gelukkig wel ja. Na 100 video's met een pro-boeren thematiek mag dat ook wel eens een keertje.
    3
  792. ⁠ @jhholz  Für 25.000 können sie locker ein MG5 kaufen.
    3
  793.  @m-nnoholly  you realize animals eat plants right?
    3
  794. ⁠ @richardkruger9838  In Chile wird kaum was produziert, es ist nur ein Testanlage mit eine Windturbine daneben. Aber egal wo es produziert wird, es bleibt einfach viel und viel zu ineffizient. Nur für Flugzeuge macht das vielleicht Sinn.
    3
  795.  @richardkruger9838  Wie schon gesagt durch ALXK, ein Auto auf E-Fuels verbraucht 7x soviel Strom als ein Elektroauto. Sieben. Es macht deswegen keinen sinn es auf die Straße zu bringen, und wenn das passiert wird einfach niemand es kaufen weil 1 Liter einfach unbezahlbar sein wird. In Straßenverkehr macht es Null sinn.
    3
  796. Wappies
    3
  797.  @jec_ecart  I know everything about it. That changes nothing about the life cycle emissions that have been calculated countless of times and can be found easily online in several research reports. You can do it. Good luck.
    3
  798. Hydrogen is not a competition at all to Tesla or any other EV manufacturer.
    3
  799.  @truthseeker.108  Hydrogen cars are far less efficient, much more complex to build and maintain and therefore cost more per mile and to maintain.
    3
  800.  @Scalbow95  Just laws of physics.
    3
  801. You don’t think CO2 emissions should be decreased as fast as possible?
    3
  802. Nope it has not.
    3
  803.  @ankur313  No. You just don’t like reality.
    3
  804. Volume would be the problem. Compressed air cars exist, but are also (just like hydrogen) very inefficient.
    3
  805.  @yousuck7933  De maatregelen zijn gericht tegen de veehouderij, niet tegen akkerbouw. Zuivel en vlees dienen veel duurder te worden omdat de impact op milieu en klimaat gigantisch groot is. Hierdoor zullen mensen vanzelf gaan overstappen op verantwoorde alternatieven.
    3
  806. They will have to go fully electric obviously.
    3
  807. nohaste4me Neehoor en vooral niet thuis. Daar gaat het filmpje juist over.
    3
  808. The video completely forgot to mention that the vast majority of charging will happen at night by using AC ‘slow’ charging.
    3
  809.  @AdLockhorst-bf8pz  De accu zal de rest van het voertuig overleven.
    3
  810. MrPatriickzz Een elektrische auto bouwen veroorzaakt wat meer CO2, maar is daarna super efficient. Een waterstofauto is zn hele leven lang super inefficient.
    3
  811.  @disruptivegarage  Dat is zeker waar. Wellicht dat een combinatie van beide iets kan zijn. Het is vooral interessant wat Tesla gaat doen nu ze de condensator-technologie van Maxwell in handen hebben.
    3
  812. Doesn't matter. The final product still is way better emissions wise than any diesel or petrol car is capable of.
    3
  813. Lol!
    3
  814.  @hydeparkist  Alle vormen van veehouderij zijn enorm vervuilend.
    2
  815.  @1rjona  nah, charging is cheaper on average
    2
  816.  @MR_THINQ  Porsche doesn’t have a clue. The fuel they ‘invented’ is a terribly inefficient way to power a car, requiring at least 5 times as much electricity. Porsche just want to continue selling engines. Combustion engines are dead, game over.
    2
  817.  @jonathanpalmquist4894  Correct. Tesla never claimed the new cells to be cobalt free.
    2
  818. The lithium will obviously be recycled.
    2
  819.  @shine-on-tv8082  Still far cleaner than gasoline or diesel.
    2
  820. Much cleaner than anything else.
    2
  821.  @mrgurulittle7000  Wrong. Hydrogen fuel cell cars need lithium, cobalt, platinum and nickel as well.
    2
  822.  @mrgurulittle7000  Lol, hydrogen cars require 3 times as much electricity.
    2
  823.  @mrgurulittle7000  Fuel cells don’t come falling from the sky either. Battery production emissions are quickly compensated. Hydrogen cars are inefficient every single day for the rest of their life.
    2
  824.  @mrgurulittle7000  The point is that batteries can be charged 100% renewably but fuel cell use will lead to some kind of toxic waste and reliance on China for metals AND requires 3 times as much energy, so we will need 3 times as many solar panels, wind turbines and power stations.
    2
  825.  @mrgurulittle7000  You have no clue. EVs can spend months parked in cold weather. Losses over 1 day is completely negligible and absolutely incomparable to the losses in the whole hydrogen ecosystem. Again, there is a factor 3 difference.
    2
  826.  @mrgurulittle7000  Hydrogen cars are inefficient due to laws of physics. This will never change.
    2
  827.  @mrgurulittle7000  Not at all.
    2
  828.  @mrgurulittle7000  Both vehicles were highly efficient.
    2
  829. Exactly sir
    2
  830. ​ @CorrespondenceTheory  There are countless cities around the world using battery electric city busses. These cities simply chose battery electric and not hydrogen because it's better and cheaper. They charge at night and at longer stops using catenary charging systems. It's not problem at all and definitely not a reason to use inefficient hydrogen. It just doesn't make sense in road vehicles and definitely not city busses.
    2
  831. Stil FAR better than diesel or gasoline.
    2
  832.  @mcsike7264  he is just making shit up 😂
    2
  833. Waarom druk je op je spatiebalk vóór dat je een punt typt?!
    2
  834. Neehoor, het is sowieso beter om massaal elektrisch te gaan rijden. Stroom opwekken met een kolen- of gascentrale is veel efficienter dan iedereen met z'n eigen verbrandingsmotortje te laten rondpuffen. Het bespaart dus altijd CO2. Daarnaast zorg je natuurlijk voor een schonere lucht omdat je nu nog maar één uitlaat hebt, buiten dichtbevolkte gebieden. Los daarvan, het is natuurlijk super dom om eerst te wachten totdat alle stroom groen is. Stel je voor dat we over een paar decennia dan op dat punt zouden aankomen en iedereen nog doodleuk in een benzine-auto rijdt xD
    2
  835. So eventually all cars should be banned from ferries, tunnels and garages?
    2
  836.  @ginog5037  ? the point is that all cars will be electric in the future.
    2
  837. Noem ze gewoon veehouders in plaats van boeren.
    2
  838. Energy consumption of phones has also increased a lot.
    2
  839. Exactly.
    2
  840. Veehouders hebben we helemaal niet nodig en het is duidelijk dat zij de grootste uitstoters zijn.
    2
  841.  @markplott4820  Correct, I didn't deny all of those things. I love EVs because of that.
    2
  842. Lol LPG is just another hydrocarbon. Nothing fancy about it. Emissions are only marginally lower than gasoline.
    2
  843.  @Forvevogel  exactly
    2
  844. Because it is, and will always be, very inefficient.
    2
  845. An electric car is always cleaner, even when charged on fossil electricty.
    2
  846. Because car emissions are always measured at the tail pipe, not well to wheel. Petrol cars are also advertised with tail pipe emissions only.
    2
  847. Tja, waterstof voor auto's is gewoon een kansloos plan. Je hebt ongeveer drie keer zoveel energie nodig om dezelfde afstand als een auto met batterijen af te leggen. Onbetaalbaar dus en onnodig ingewikkeld. Het is een gepasseerd station.
    2
  848. It will never be a mainstream thing
    2
  849. Exactly. Hydrogen is dumb for pretty much all road transport.
    2
  850. BrabusBandit used to be free in the beginning. Most EV owners charge at home 90% of the time.
    2
  851. Ok wappie
    2
  852. Nope. Is al tig keer onderzocht. Elektrische auto’s zijn altijd schoner dan benzine of diesel.
    2
  853. I'm sending signals Dat is niet relevant. Een elektrische auto is namelijk al na zo’n 30.000 km schoner dan een diesel- of benzineauto. https://nos.nl/l/2346236
    2
  854. Daar gaat het ook niet om.
    2
  855.  @cobaltblue2756  exactly
    2
  856. Gar nicht. Man kann einfach 1000 km pro tach faheren in weniger als 11 Stunden.
    2
  857. En het zal nauwelijks verschil maken in reistijd.
    2
  858.  @Jerry.V  Door kruispunten, stoplichten, zebrapaden enzovoort zal het geen verschil maken. Door de stad rijden is sowieso traag.
    2
  859. Dat het kan betekent niet dat het een goed idee is. Het is namelijk enorm inefficient.
    2
  860.  @Kimbrough87  Yes, they therefore definitely see it as a threat.
    2
  861. ​ @damian246  Laden kost in praktijk nauwelijks meer tijd doordat je toch af en toe een pauze moet houden.
    2
  862.  @damian246  Nee, want die 3 uur klopt van geen kant
    2
  863. CNG still creates loads of CO2...
    2
  864. @Aho Ka? Exactly haha
    2
  865.  @xhonkeri4066  But hydrogen will never work well 😂
    2
  866.  @xhonkeri4066  Even the most simple batteries and electric motors are more efficient than high end fuel cell tech
    2
  867. Ramses19912 Ze hebben het niet over verbranding.
    2
  868. Hydrogen vehicles are far more polluting than EVs.
    2
  869. Hydrogen cars require batteries as well + a fuel cell and a fuel tank. Current EV batteries outlast the rest of the vehicle. Hydrogen high pressure components are designed for 10 years but the fuel cell itself will be worn out way before that - as well as the batteries that have to cycle much more than EV batteries.
    2
  870.  @IndieKeeko  Not never ending but very long lasting. Data shows they will outlast the rest of the vehicle. Where I live there is a shitload of chargers anywhere.
    2
  871.  @jammiedodger7040  Even at 45,000 miles an EV is far more favorable. Hydrogen engines can never become significantly more efficient than they are now simply because of physics. Biofuel should be reserved for applications where there is no alternative like long distance shipping and aviation. Using it in cars is a terrible waste.
    2
  872. Ik sta voor 0% achter de veehouders.
    2
  873. Which 6 year old EV did you buy?
    2
  874. Du glaubst wirklich das das nicht gemacht wird?!
    2
  875. Niks mis met akkerbouwers, maar veeteelt moet zo snel mogelijk tot het verleden behoren.
    2
  876. Precies!
    2
  877.  @SabineHossenfelder  You keep forgetting that grid upgrades are not necessary for mass adoption of EVs. An average car only drives 40 km per day (Germany) which equates to only 8 kWh.
    2
  878. Veeteelt hoort sowieso niet thuis in de 21e eeuw.
    2
  879. What on earth would be the benefit of a portable electrolyser? Where does the energy come from?!
    2
  880.  @ansjovisnl9059  Ook vervuilend ja.
    2
  881.  @ansjovisnl9059  Zeker. En tegelijkertijd zullen andere oplossingen, zoals het verkleinen van de veestapel, ook gewoon uitgevoerd moeten worden.
    2
  882.  @alanx4121  Iedereen kan zonder vlees als het maar duur genoeg wordt.
    2
  883.  @antongonist8294  Maatregelen voor de industrie zullen volgen zoals meermaals is aangekondigd. Als je niet de enige schuldige (maar wel de meest belangrijke) bent is dat geen argument om maar niks te hoeven doen.
    2
  884. Veehouders verdienen geen steun.
    2
  885. Waste and efficiency are not the same. Batteries will be recycled by the way.
    2
  886.  @andyman8630  haha!
    2
  887.  @Max34557  It’s nothing compared to the consumption of the electric motor (about 15000 watt at constant speed). After 1 hour of driving 2 H7 lights have eaten away 0,1 kWh from the battery. That’s equal to about 600 meters of driving distance.
    2
  888. Renewable energy is not a scam. It has significantly lowered emissions all over the world and will continue to do so. Nuclear will likely play a role in energy generation in many countries, but it is not a golden solution. Construction of nuclear power stations is incredibly expensive and often takes decades of planning, far too slow. And obviously then there is the waste problem and the dependency of uranium supplying countries.
    2
  889. Not really. The biggest problem with fuel cell cars is that they are intrinsically inefficient. EVs have always been very efficient since day 1. Fuel cells last shorter than current batteries. Proper EV batteries (Tesla) last hundreds of thousands of miles and will thus often survive the car itself. Lithium ion batteries are definitely recyclable. Mass adoption of fuel cell vehicles would be an insane waste of energy and thus slow down the whole energy transition.
    2
  890. EpsilonAlpha π You don’t seem to get the definition of efficiency right. Weight does not say anything about efficiency. It’s about energy per distance. That has always been low with EVs, even in the very beginning.
    2
  891. Wrong
    2
  892. Lol so much bull shit. "I remain convinced Hydrogen (possibly cracked from seawater by wind power or by power from Rolls Royce’s future mini reactors) and synthetic liquid fuels made by the sun’s energy remain a far better environmental bet for de-carbonising road transport from 2030." He is concerned about the energy required for battery production and then all of a sudden he starts to propose utterly inefficient technologies like hydrogen and synthetic fuels 😂😂
    2
  893.  @gissit1967  Again: exactly the same for fuel cell vehicles and probably even more because you need to multiply the number of required wind turbines and solar panels by three.
    2
  894. Wrong. Storage of hydrogen as a liquid requires cryogenic temperatures because the boiling point of hydrogen at one atmosphere pressure is −252.8°C. Hydrogen at 700 bar at ambient temperature is a gas.
    2
  895.  @user-RCST  exactly
    2
  896. Current generation EVs are absolutely fine for long journeys.
    2
  897. EVs are a far better solution.
    2
  898. fapsmar Klopt en daarom moeten we ook lekker door gaan. Het zou een beetje raar zijn als we hier over een paar decennia nog rondpuffen op benzine en diesel en de rest van de wereld elektrisch door het leven zoeft he 😄
    2
  899. EVs have been working just fine for over a decade.
    2
  900.  @meckhardt2112  Exactly, batteries will also play a massive role in public transportation.
    2
  901.  @meckhardt2112  Yeah catenary wires are great. Should definitely be the preferred choice over batteries. It is not a universal solution however as it won’t be an option in less densely populated areas.
    2
  902.  @Thedarkrainbow356  20% is pretty good already and driving electric is ALWAYS cleaner. The grid becomes greener every year, it is a gradual process.
    2
  903.  @PG-3462  Solid state batteries would require lithium as well.
    2
  904. Yeah sounds very efficient..
    2
  905.  @pukaman2000  Efficiency is what counts for next few decades.
    2
  906.  @pukaman2000  You forget that you would need three to four times the amount of wind turbines to make enough hydrogen for an equal amount of vehicles compared to EVs.
    2
  907. Not efficient enough. Combustion engines are not part of the solution.
    2
  908. De hoogste tijd om de veehouderij drastisch te verkleinen.
    2
  909. Dat is jouw probleem
    2
  910.  @Skreebee  There is plenty of research out there that proves that an EV always produces less CO2 than a comparable combustion engine car. Burning fuel in an engine and production of fuel is just so terribly inefficient that it is quite easy for an EV to do better than this.
    2
  911.  @Darkness251  genau
    2
  912. There is no transition technology need because the transition will take place gradually. Cars will not be scrapped needlessly. They simply get replaced naturally by EVs. Yes, also in developing countries eventually.
    2
  913.  @NoiserToo  Not really actually.
    2
  914.  @devinbender8428  Exactly.
    2
  915. Guess what, the electricity comes from exactly the same source as where the hydrogen factory gets it...
    2
  916.  @librarian_maarten  Je ziet problemen die er niet zijn. In praktijk zal niemand tegelijkertijd meerdere auto’s gaan opladen in combinatie met allerlei huishoudelijke activiteiten. Auto’s opladen doe je uiteraard op momenten dat elektriciteit het goedkoopst is (midden op de dag en ‘s nachts). Het is uitgesloten dat waterstof een rol gaat spelen in huishoudens. 10-15 jaar geleden had je daar misschien nog over kunnen speculeren, maar dit punt zijn we nu echt voorbij.
    2
  917. Goede keuze van die familie.
    2
  918. It’s in the video...
    2
  919.  @roydavis5613  There is not much to improve when it comes to dairy and meat production. It needs to be decreased massively.
    2
  920. Regarding what property exactly?
    2
  921.  @robertdegroot8302  The point was that the original title refers to the city, while the subject applies to the whole country. I am Dutch and I prefer The Netherlands.
    2
  922. En nog een wappie
    2
  923. 4:35 the 48V auxiliary battery has absolutely nothing to do with the charging speed of the traction battery.
    2
  924. Just use a fast charger.
    2
  925. Lol
    2
  926. In vehicle hydrogen production would require unnecessary components (electrolyzer, compressor) and it would require a lot of time to produce some hydrogen. Much longer than charging a battery. Battery weight is not really a problem and BEVs are cheaper than FCEVs in general.
    2
  927. Universe2965 Mehh not really needed for cars. Just put a nice battery in it and charge it at a fast charger. Problem solved. For aircraft hydrogen could be a solution in the far future indeed.
    2
  928. Graag zo snel mogelijk.
    2
  929. In Europe the E-Sprinter can be charged at Tesla chargers.
    2
  930. Battery electric vehicles will get us much faster to net zero because their efficiency.
    2
  931.  @tangoymoto  Das problem is CO2, egal ob wir von Benzin, Diesel oder LPG reden.
    2
  932.  @mrvwbug4423  Public curbside AC charging is very common in many European countries already.
    2
  933.  @JamesCampbell-vf2hf  Waarschijnlijk niet. Ze zitten vol met gewilde grondstoffen dus die worden gewoon fatsoenlijk uit elkaar gehaald. Bovendien zitten er in waterstofauto's ook accu's.
    2
  934.  @vlorisperry  Momenteel circa 100 kg CO2 per kWh aan accucapaciteit. Dat compenseer je makkelijk binnen een paar jaar rijden.
    2
  935.  @MosheBenChaim  Je hebt duidelijk nul verstand van het technische verhaal achter elektrische auto's en waterstofauto's.
    2
  936.  @ds-yr9qn  Dat is niet relevant. Zelfs op grijze stroom is een elektrische auto de schoonste oplossing.
    2
  937.  @ds-yr9qn  Het is de enige realistische optie die er is. Waterstof en waterstofauto’s zijn nog veel duurder.
    2
  938.  @HPFT2002  Je doet alsof je er veel verstand van hebt, maar dat is blijkbaar niet het geval. Zowel elektrische auto’s als waterstofauto’s zijn zwaarder dan auto’s met een verbandingsmotor maar ze produceren allebei weinig fijnstof omdat ze voornamelijk regeneratief remmen en er dus bijna geen fijnstof van de remmen komt. Het verschil in fijnstofproductie van de banden is nihil. Voor de productie van waterstofauto’s moet er platinum, nickel, kobalt en lithium gedolven worden. En nee, waterstof is geen energiebron maar een energiedrager die heel erg inefficient is. Een waterstofauto verbruikt per kilometer drie keer zoveel stroom als een elektrische auto. Als we dus massaal op waterstof zouden gaan rijden (wat gelukkig niet gaat gebeuren) dan zouden we dus drie keer zo veel windmolens en zonnepanelen nodig hebben.
    2
  939.  @ds-yr9qn  Totdat je een keer een goeie EV hebt geprobeerd.
    2
  940.  @wimeatsworld  Middelgrote elektrische vrachtwagens bestaan al en grote vrachtwagens die lange afstanden kunnen afleggen zullen in de toekomst ook gewoon elektrisch zijn. Waterstofvoertuigen zijn ontzettend inefficient waardoor ze drie keer zoveel elektriciteit verbruiken en dus drie keer zoveel CO2 uitstoten als een batterij-elektrisch voertuig.
    2
  941. Veestapel zo snel mogelijk halveren a.u.b. En daarna nog een paar keer.
    2
  942.  @123ewoud  Onzin. Youtube filtert automatisch alle links.
    2
  943. The point is EVs require much less of that energy.
    2
  944. But FAR more energy required. Thus the need for three times as many wind turbines, solar panels and power stations.
    2
  945. Maar niet in zulke grote getalen. De veehouderij is gigantisch gegroeid de afgelopen decennia met alle gevolgen voor de natuur en het klimaat van dien.
    2
  946.  @mjflora1980  Alle vormen van industrie dienen te verduurzamen. Dus ook de voedselvoorziening.
    2
  947. ​ @opoxious1592  Ga je alsjeblieft inlezen. Dit gaat echt helemaal nergens over.
    2
  948. Not at all.
    2
  949.  @leendertwassenaar1934  Er zijn talloze redenen om te stoppen met het consumeren van vlees en zuivel, klimaat is er slechts een van.
    2
  950.  @richardalfaro4933  EVs only need 10 kWh per day on average. Absolutely no problem for any grid.
    2
  951. Overproduction of renewables in the summer could indeed be stored in the form of hydrogen. But then it would still be very inefficient to use it in vehicles. Better just convert it back to electricity and charge EVs with it.
    2
  952. Lol hydrogen is a mindbogglingly stupid technology for cars.
    2
  953.  @ezio_g  1. It takes a lot of energy to isolate hydrogen 2. Hydrogen is not a source of energy. 3. Hydrogen can be used to store energy and as a chemical ingredient. Wide adoptation in road vehicles is unlikely due to low efficiency en complexity. 4. HHO generators in ICE cars have nothing to do with this and are a fraud.
    2
  954. Je zou maar zo dom zijn om het niet te begrijpen..
    2
  955.  @ckmm9908  Het hele idee van evolutie is dat nieuwe diersoorten uit anderen evolueren.
    2
  956.  @kalef1234  Yes. No Cobalt, no nickel. Just lithium and iron based.
    2
  957. Not at all. A wind turbine compensates within half a year on average for its production emissions.
    2
  958.  @anthonymorris5084  Simple: because upfront cost is still higher.
    2
  959.  @anthonymorris5084  Products like EVs and heatpumps have a direct effect on lowering CO2 emissions. Therefore subsidies and incentives are completely justified.
    2
  960. Nee. De amazone wordt gekapt voor veevoer.
    2
  961. Very weak arguments. The future is electric, without ze combustion engines.
    2
  962. It is far more viable than hydrogen.
    2
  963. Natural gas produces about the same amount of CO2 as diesel or gasoline...
    2
  964. Of course and that is how it always has been. The video however, is about comparing NEW cars. Without people buying new cars, there won’t be any cheap used cars for others to buy.
    2
  965. Much better than diesel anyway.
    2
  966. Inderdaad. En dan zijn er ook nog de ontheffingsmogelijkheden.
    2
  967. Milan Swoboda And then the silence remains..
    2
  968. BubbaJo of course not 😂
    2
  969. BubbaJo It’s a dead end road. Elon realised hydrogen is a waste of energy and resources in an early stage.
    2
  970. No it should not. Hydrogen is terribly inefficient and therefore unable to make a decent dent in CO2 emissions.
    2
  971. Allemaal leuk en aardig, maar de toekomst is natuurlijk gewoon zonder dierlijke producten.
    2
  972. You are clueless.
    2
  973. You have clearly never tried one.
    2
  974. layerdballoon Electric vehicles require no shifting. Not manual nor automatic.
    2
  975. Akkerbouwers ja. Maar we kunnen prima zonder de veehouderij.
    2
  976. No it should not and pretty much anyone knows this already.
    2
  977. Zucht. De veehouderij is niet van deze tijd dus er komt sowieso vroeg of laat een eind aan. Stop er nou gewoon mee man en pak die centen.
    2
  978. Because if many people start to believe the myth about hydrogen technology there is a lot more energy needed to keep our world moving so it will simply be more difficult to stop global warming.
    2
  979.  @JakobFischer60  exactly
    2
  980. Jawel hoor. Ook jij gaat gewoon elektrisch rijden.
    2
  981. But far more expensive ≠ win
    2
  982.  @lamebubblesflysohigh  Not really. It’s because hydrogen is inefficient.
    2
  983.  @lamebubblesflysohigh Combusting hydrogen is even more inefficient than using it in a fuel cell. Cost per mile will be outrageous, nobody is going to use it. Everybody is focussing on batteries which is what the vast majority of trucks will be using. Some corner cases might be relying on hydrogen fuel cells but that's it.
    2
  984.  @lamebubblesflysohigh  Yes, but by the time hydrogen gets a chance to mature in that field it might already be overtaken by battery technology, offering a far lower price per mile.
    2
  985.  @lamebubblesflysohigh Yes, and if that is not the case it won't take long.
    2
  986. Maar de kippen worden nog steeds misbruikt en vermoord.
    2
  987. Lol of course you need to buy an EV. They are great. And yes, stationary backup batteries are nice too.
    2
  988.  @johnra-x8p  zwaar overdreven, maar goed, daarom moet je ook een jonge occasion kopen.
    2
  989.  @aliancemd Yes, but I think it is unlikely these aircraft are relying on LFP.
    2
  990. ‘C02 iS PlAnT fO0D!!111!’
    2
  991. Moeilijk he, verandering
    2
  992.  @weertgilders8172  Gas veroorzaakt alsnog veel te veel CO2. Ook in buurlanden wordt gas in veel gevallen gewoon overgeslagen en richt men zich meteen op elektrificatie.
    2
  993.  @mrgurulittle7000  Incredibly inefficient
    2
  994.  @mrgurulittle7000  The problem is that you think that it is dirty.
    2
  995. Very well said. We see this every time.
    2
  996.  @Blue_Collar_Hunter  lol
    2
  997. Nice!
    2
  998. 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
  999.  @liftedj7544  Nope. Mining emissions are compensated for within 3 years of driving. An EV is always the cleanest option.
    2
  1000. Meh, in large parts of the world EV is far superior already.
    2
  1001.  @Gordanovich02  It's just simple physics.
    2
  1002. Nicee
    2
  1003. Electric motors are far better
    2
  1004.  @jamesmallec Schon beeindruckend 😂
    2
  1005.  @j.markkrzystofiak9907  Common misconception. Emissions of hydrogen production are far higher (there won't be enough renewables for many decades to come) over the lifetime of the vehicle than the emissions of manufacturing a battery pack and charging the vehicle.
    2
  1006. Super duper inefficient plus it also emits NOx
    2
  1007.  @malteschaper3782 pee bottle?
    2
  1008.  @Lee-fw9mr  Well said.
    2
  1009. It was not
    2
  1010.  @ialsoagree  Exactly. An ICE remains super inefficient its entire lifetime, a BEV is super efficient from the first meter it drives.
    2
  1011. Hydrogen will always remain insanely inefficient and way too complicated. Battery has already won 10 years ago.
    2
  1012.  @Apis4  Lol
    2
  1013. Common misconception. Hydrogen will always remain very inefficient compared to batteries simply because of physics. Also, there won’t be any reason to switch to hydrogen in the future anyway as battery electric vehicles are far more simple to build and maintain. Nobody would want to go back to a refueling system if you could simply charge your car at home while you sleep. Also, it’s not relevant that hydrogen is ‘abundant’ as electrons are just as abundant.
    2
  1014. Ik vind het nog steeds grappig dat er mensen zijn die denken dat elektrische auto’s slecht zijn voor het milieu terwijl al honderd keer wetenschappelijk is aangetoond dat dit niet zo is. Het is duidelijk dat je je nog nooit fatsoenlijk hebt ingelezen. Om te beginnen: https://nos.nl/l/2346236
    2
  1015.  @masihfarkish789  Gewoon een kwestie van jezelf een beetje inlezen.
    2
  1016. Not at all. Hydrogen cars are terribly inefficient and therefore a very poor solution to lower CO2 emissions. And no, they will never be cheaper than an EV. The most advanced hydrogen production car available is the Toyota Mirai and it has a range of 650 km. Equal to a Tesla Model S Long Range.
    2
  1017. Gelukkig is er genoeg ander leuk werk te doen.
    2
  1018.  @melissarainchild  De huidige lithium ion-batterijen zijn dat al en het wordt alleen nog maar beter.
    2
  1019. But hydrogen cars will never get anywhere close to the efficiency of an EV. That is the real problem.
    2
  1020.  @abansalify  For hydrogen cars you need lithium, cobalt, nickel, copper and platinum. And in order to create enough renewable energy for hydrogen production you need to build and maintain 3 times as many solar panels and windturbines compared to EVs. It’s a misconception that hydrogen cars solve the material problem.
    2
  1021. Samuel Boyle Two famous misconceptions. Battery production is not as bad as many people think. CO2 emissions are currently about 100 kg per kWh capacity produced. Cobalt content is going down and will soon be a thing of the past. Current batteries last hundreds of thousands of kilometers. Much longer than any fuel cell. You realise that fuel cell production also requires mining and causes emissions? And no, a Tesla battery does not ‘die’ after two weeks. It holds energy for many months.
    2
  1022. Cars use compressed hydrogen.
    2
  1023. Ik kan me moeilijk voorstellen dan onze hybride afdankertjes massaal naar Noorwegen gaan. Ze zijn daar al veel verder met de acceptatie van de volledig elektrische auto waardoor de gemiddelde Noor z'n neus ophaalt voor een auto waar nog een uitlaat onder zit.
    2
  1024. Uiteraard kun je met elektriciteit CO2 combineren met waterstof tot een koolwaterstof naar wens. Energie ermee creëeren gaat dus niet. Hooguit omzetten van elektrische energie naar chemische verbindingen die je dan in de fik kunt steken. Voor sommige toepassingen nuttig, maar enorm inefficient.
    2
  1025.  @xXAlmdudlerXx  Guess what, it is far easier to install a bunch of fast chargers at the premises of a gas station.
    2
  1026.  @xXAlmdudlerXx  All EVs sold these days can charge fast. Hydrogen refueling often takes far longer than a few minutes due to the limits of repressurization of the system.
    2
  1027. Het antwoord is nooit omdat waterstof niet goedkoper is dan benzine.
    2
  1028. Just because you think there is not enough lithium does not mean that there is not enough lithium. There is shit loads of it.
    2
  1029. The dairy and meat industry are one.
    2
  1030. Capacitors have a high power density, but low energy density. It would be impossible to store the amount of energy of a large EV battery in a capacitor first.
    2
  1031. Waay less is burned to produce and maintain solar panels and windturbines. A wind turbine only has to operate half a year to compensate for its production emissions. They are built to last 20 years.
    2
  1032. Wait, so the grid shown at 1:04 is 3 phase? As in: each phase is 120 degrees apart from the next phase? So how can it be that people claim that the two hot wires from the 240V dryer receptacle are 180 degrees apart?
    2
  1033.  @duhtuurlijk  Het is uitgesloten dat waterstof bij wegverkeer ooit een prominente rol zal spelen.
    2
  1034.  @duhtuurlijk  Omdat het simpelweg altijd ontzettend inefficiënt en omslachtig zal blijven. China is helemaal niet zo met waterstof bezig. De industrie concentreert zich juist op de ontwikkeling van accu's, wat de afgelopen jaren enorm goede resultaten heeft opgeleverd. Ook bussen en vrachtwagen kunnen prima batterij-elektrisch worden aangedreven zoals de afgelopen jaren is bewezen. Het recyclen van batterijen is helemaal niet zo ingewikkeld en zou een ontzettend zwak argument zijn om dan maar over te stappen op waterstof. De huidige generatie EV's hebben accu's die makkelijk de levensduur van de auto meegaan (en langer), dus dat is allang geen reden meer. Alles wat ik hier schrijf is allang en breed bekend (al jaren) en praktisch alle autofabrikanten hebben dit inmiddels ook beseft. Groene waterstof hebben we keihard nodig en zal een belangrijke rol spelen in de energietransitie, maar niet op de weg. Nu niet, in de toekomst niet.
    2
  1035.  @timpalmer-logstolumber1999  I am not claiming anyone can switch to an EV right now. As you said, upfront cost and the availability of charging networks in certain parts of the world make it still difficult. My point is the technology is simply ready and has proven itself for over a decade. Regarding emissions, yes even if you include the emissions created during the grid expansion and reinforcement it is all worth it. Even on mainly gas and coal electricity an EV creates less CO2 during its entire lifecycle. It doesn’t need to be carbon neutral right now, it simply is a big improvement compared to burning diesel and gasoline. Therefore EV adoption needs to happen fast.
    2
  1036. Waterstofauto's zijn ook elektrisch hoor. Jij denkt aan het verbranden van waterstof in motoren, maar dat is sowieso niet aan de orde. Brandstofmotoren zijn gewoon voorbij.
    2
  1037.  @racevoltGamerthemecedesguy  No we can't. Combustion engines are pretty much at their maximum efficiency.
    2
  1038. ​ @racevoltGamerthemecedesguy  F1 engines are not 50% efficient, there is just one engine that reached 50% in laboratory settings. F1 reaches about 40% on the track, not that special. Modern passenger cars reach 30 to 35%, mainly restricted by emissions standards. Even if it ever were ever possible to make a normal car 50% efficient, CO2 emissions are higher than any electric car. It's a dead end road.
    2
  1039.  @AmurTiger  Of course, we need a lot more rail cargo. I was just curious if there were any (recent) examples of countries with intensified railcargo that resulted in significantly less truck usage.
    2
  1040. Exactly! Hydrogen is over.
    2
  1041.  @thebrowns5337  Most early Teslas are doing absolutely fine.
    2
  1042.  @bryanduncan6178  Not really. A wide adoption of hydrogen vehicles would mean an insane increase of electricity consumption and thus massive CO2 emissions.
    2
  1043.  @RonanB99  Green hydrogen does not exist and will not exist in any serious amounts the coming decades. The small amounts of green hydrogen that will be available should be used in situations where pure electric is not an option and as a feedstock for the chemical industry. Using green hydrogen for vehicles is a horrible waste of precious renewable energy. And guess what, hydrogen cars require lithium, cobalt, nickel and platinum.
    2
  1044.  @RonanB99  Still an insane waste of energy. You can charge 3 times the number of EVs with the same amount of renewable electricity. It's a dumb technology. In the end green hydrogen would require 3 times as many wind turbines and solar panels. Now think again about all the materials required.
    2
  1045.  @RonanB99  Yeah possibly, but it should be minimised as much as possible. Passenger cars is a big no no in any case, and so are public transport busses and pretty soon trucks. Heavy machinery and eventually aircraft is fine.
    2
  1046.  @RonanB99  It's simple. Electric busses with a range of 400 to 500 km already exist. Fast chargers (1 MW) than can charge these things in half an hour will be here much faster than hydrogen ever gets a chance to develop. Same for trucks. Governments often have no clue about the realities of hydrogen or are advised by the fossil industry.
    2
  1047.  @RonanB99  Sure, but infrastructure isn't there and hydrogen does not make sense in cities (short range). Long range electric busses and chargers will be here before hydrogen gets a chance and that's a good thing.
    2
  1048. ​ @RonanB99  Not really. Current hydrogen busses are the remains of a short hype from a few years a go. Meanwhile electric busses are selling like hot cakes.
    2
  1049.  @RonanB99  It's sad to see local governments in the UK still fall for the hydrogen trap. There is no business case for hydrogen city busses. Oh well, it will just be a matter of time before they realise battery electric busses are far cheaper to run.
    2
  1050.  @FreeSpeechWarrior  Nope, it was a scam. The contraption obviously never worked as mr. Meyer claimed and he was not killed because of it.
    2
  1051. So how do the weights get out of the mine shaft again?
    2
  1052. And EVs are MUCH more efficient.
    2
  1053. lol. "from what I have read" there is your problem.
    2
  1054. But still very scarce and should therefore not be wasted on hydrogen.
    2
  1055.  @anthonymorris5084  1. Jungles and forests?! You might be confused by agricultural practices. 2. Solar panels are extremely useful.
    2
  1056.  @thelivefromdenmark Iveco Group.
    2
  1057. Hybrid was cool 20 years ago. You can easily cover the vast majority of Europe in this thing and so can you Yellowstone. Diesel is never clean.
    2
  1058. No, you cannot. Wrap your head around some basic physics and you will understand why 'self charging cars' are completely impossible.
    2
  1059. There is not much to go wrong on EVs and you can still work on suspension, brakes and drive shafts.
    2
  1060. Dude you don’t even know the difference between power and energy.
    2
  1061.  @cheech8257  Thorium-Reaktoren gibt es nicht und wird es auch nicht geben für sehr lange Zeit.
    2
  1062. Te duur, te weinig vraag naar waterstof. Voertuigen op waterstof gaat nooit wat worden. Voor kunstmest- en staalproductie zal het uiteindelijk nodig zijn, maar dit is nog vrij ver weg - evenals synthetische brandstof voor de luchtvaart. Het vergt enorme investeringen en dat heeft simpelweg tijd nodig (en een CO2-tax).
    2
  1063. [][][][][][][][] Hoezo? Aardolieproducten in de fik steken is aantoonbaar slecht voor onszelf en onze plateet dus moeten we het op termijn verbieden.
    2
  1064.  @deleteduser8949 Elektrisch rijden is ook vervuilend, maar wel veel minder dan welke V8 of hybride dan ook.
    2
  1065.  @josephj6521 Good point
    2
  1066. Batteries are not an energy source...
    2
  1067.  @paulbedichek2679  Well it results in lower emissions so I don't see a problem for the time being. By the way, hydrogen cars consume far more electricity so if I were the coal and natural gas industry I would promote hydrogen instead...
    2
  1068. Too inefficient
    2
  1069.  @roninviking  Regarding combustion in the engine: comparable. Regarding well to wheel efficiency: hard to say. LPG comes from a fossil source, hydrogen is (ideally) made from electricity.
    2
  1070. Alsnog veel beter dan rijden op benzine of diesel.
    2
  1071.  @paulwee1924dus  Nope
    2
  1072.  @MVV043  Het delven van lithium stelt niets voor in vergelijking met het winnen en raffineren van olie. Bovendien hoeft het slechts één keer plaats te vinden voor het produceren van een auto. Graag ontvang ik een bron waaruit dat versleten accu’s van elektrische auto’s de grens over gaan.
    2
  1073.  @TellySavalas-or5hf  Ik verkondig niets nieuws hoor. Lees je eens in.
    2
  1074. John Wu It won’t. Current batteries last very long.
    2
  1075. Ja dat is hartstikke slim. Zelfs als je altijd op grijze stroom rijdt is de uitstoot lager dan benzine of diesel.
    2
  1076. Batteries losing some mentionable charge is not a matter of weeks but months. Other things mentioned don’t really make a difference. Hydrogen vs battery is not about the details but about the bigger picture of energy efficiency.
    2
  1077. Smellysockx, jij begrijpt het gelukkig.
    2
  1078.  @VT___  Precies.
    2
  1079. Oh yes you will.
    2
  1080. Not that much of an issue. Especially if the battery is kept between certain states charge.
    2
  1081. Quite bad emission wise.
    2
  1082. Gelukkig wel ja.
    2
  1083. Exactly. The shavings of the pencil and the remaining part of the pencil still land in landfills degassing exactly the same amount of green house gasses.
    2
  1084.  @ale_idsardi1615  Dat ook natuurlijk.
    2
  1085. job van malestein heggenschaar
    2
  1086.  @Teutonius88  Herstel van natuur, oftewel onze leefomgeving.
    2
  1087. @ er is veel meer geld te verdienen aan het negeren van de stikstofcrisis
    2
  1088.  @2MasterBuilder2  I am only correcting invalid arguments.
    2
  1089.  @2MasterBuilder2  It’s up to others to come up with valid arguments to correct mine.
    2
  1090. Great to see most people in the comment section actually know that hydrogen is a bad idea.
    2
  1091. Of roep ze überhaupt niet in het leven..
    2
  1092. Nope
    2
  1093.  @klasykapolskiegohh8798  it’s not. Faster refueling is the one and only advantage.
    2
  1094.  @klasykapolskiegohh8798  I am not.
    2
  1095.  @mb7392  correct
    2
  1096. Importing dairy products is about as unsustainable as it gets.
    2
  1097. It’s necessary for a better world. Not despicable at all.
    2
  1098.  @jajaed5946  Omdat er in omliggende landen veeeel minder veeteelt is.
    2
  1099. Yup.. fossil youtube is becoming increasingly desperate.
    2
  1100. Diederik van Liere Opbrengst is veel te laag.
    2
  1101. why? it's terribly inefficient
    2
  1102. kWh
    2
  1103. Who are you talking to?
    2
  1104. Meh
    2
  1105. Danielle Brugman dat is t probleem niet hoor.
    2
  1106. CCS is pretty much already the standard for DC charging in all of Europe now.
    2
  1107. Yup
    2
  1108. Still local emissions and not a solution for the masses.
    2
  1109. There are large amounts of research available on that. Short answer: currently batteries are produced with about 100 kg of CO2 emissions per kWh.
    2
  1110. Lets say all the sreens and the electronics behind it consume 500 watts. That would be 0.5 kWh per hour of driving. That's less than 3 kilometers of range!
    2
  1111. Einfach in der Nacht.
    2
  1112.  @sevennine1335  Es geht nicht um individuelle Fallen, aber um das Durchschnittgebrauch. Hier in der Straße gibt es einige Ladesäulen und viele Elektroautos und trotzdem sind die Ladeplätze oft frei. Oft wird auch in die Arbeit geladen oder während Einkaufen machen.
    2
  1113.  @technologyrethinked  True, but the efficiency is key to reduce CO2-emissions. A combustion engine on hydrogen would consume at least 5 times more electricity per kilometer than an EV.
    2
  1114.  @carlosandleon  Nope because hydrogen vehicles are intrinsically inefficient.
    2
  1115.  @allentoyokawa9068  But at the same time they are planning on massively expanding the number of chargers.
    2
  1116. It's just simple physics.
    2
  1117.  @HOMELANDERFEELS  Lithium is not mined by slave labour. It’s an industrial process that mainly involves evaporation of brine water and further refinement. Not much manual labour involved at all.
    2
  1118. He did not mention production of the batteries, fuel tanks and fuel cell for the hydrogen car either.
    2
  1119.  @jrsixowfour8674  You answered your own question.
    2
  1120. Dat kan prima hoor, als je maar geen veehouder wordt.
    2
  1121.  @gregbailey45  Well in this case we are talking aircraft and obviously 800 km vs 400 makes a huge difference.
    2
  1122. Exactly
    2
  1123. EVs have been getting cheaper every year. This will continue to do so.
    2
  1124. Dat maakt niet uit, het is sowieso efficiënter dan rijden met een verbrandingsmotor.
    2
  1125.  @jameshunter4386  So why not simply drive an electric motor with that energy from the battery?
    2
  1126. Nope
    2
  1127. It's not. Hydrogen is terribly inefficient.
    2
  1128. You are wrong.
    2
  1129.  @arnaldobellucci9033  It's a matter of time before they become cheaper. Battery replacement is very rare. They normally outlast the vehicle.
    2
  1130. Just because you think repair costs are higher doesn’t mean that is the case.
    2
  1131. Nee dat komt het niet.
    2
  1132.  @michaelfrehner4858  No they don't do that. Battery packs are made to size. That WDR video is full of lies and based on wrong data. Auke Hoekstra (University of Eindhoven) explains why it is wrong in this Twitter thread: https://twitter.com/AukeHoekstra/status/1349705031235284993?s=20
    2
  1133. You will get used to it.
    2
  1134. Just charge an EV with solar panels. Much more efficient.
    2
  1135.  @ExplorerBen7  Not sure how many solar panels you would need to fill a hydrogen car quickly enough either, but at least a factor 3 to 4 times as many compared to charging an EV.
    2
  1136.  @ExplorerBen7  Could be. But that doesn’t change the fact that an EV will gain more range in the the same amount of time while charging on that same output.
    2
  1137. It’s the best spot for fast charger parking spots. The e-Crafter has the charging port in the side (where the fuel cap normally is) and that doesn’t work at all because the fast charger cables are rather short.
    2
  1138. but energy density by volume is extremely low.
    2
  1139. 👍🏻
    2
  1140.  @anchormax3597  Only in the heads of conspiracy theorists.
    2
  1141.  @anchormax3597  I don’t see any other solution. Banning or discouraging polluting practices is nothing new and has improved life in general many times in the past.
    2
  1142.  @anchormax3597  How can ‘pollution’ not be sufficiënt? It directly effects human lives everywhere on the planet.
    2
  1143. Like Milan already stated, people don't rapid charge on a daily basis, let alone at the same time. Also: going the hydrogen route would be a super complicated and inefficient way of fixing the problem of grid capacity.
    2
  1144.  @SaveMoneySavethePlanet  So to conclude: there won’t be any significant amount left for hydrogen.
    2
  1145.  @SaveMoneySavethePlanet  Sure, but it will be many decades to come and even then there are better ways to make use of excess energy. Hydrogen will always be all the way at the end of the line.
    2
  1146. Uitstekend verwoord.
    2
  1147.  @210SAi  Thermodynamics.
    2
  1148. Lithium availability is not the problem at all.
    2
  1149. Wind turbines in general do make a lot of sense.
    2
  1150.  @deuitblinker4820  dat zou best kunnen. Het gaat om het woord ‘merendeel’ dat uiteraard compleet incorrect is.
    2
  1151. Statistisch gezien veel veiliger dan een auto met verbrandingsmotor.
    2
  1152.  @jessienameles5063  Kan prima zonder dierlijke mest.
    2
  1153. Postma hemzelf Allemaal grote onzin en nergens op gebaseerd. De huidige accu’s gaan vele tonnen aan kilometers mee en zullen in veel gevallen de auto dus overleven. Een tweedehands markt bestaat nu al hoor. Met het hoogspanningsnet is niets mis en kan het prima aan, netbeheerders kijken immers decennia vooruit. Recycling zal ook gewoon goed komen - de accu’s zitten immers propvol waardevolle materialen. En verder: niemand beweert dat elektrisch rijden klimaat neutraal is. Het gaat erom dat het veel minder slecht is dan benzine of diesel verstoken.
    2
  1154. Postma hemzelf Dat wordt in Amsterdam allang opgelost met slimme laadpalen die het vermogen afstemmen op de belasting van het net. Op die manier dragen elektrische auto’s juist bij aan het stabiliseren van het net en kunnen in sommige gevallen ook terugleveren. Groene waterstofproductie is van groot belang voor industriële toepassingen waar nu nog enorme hoeveelheden grijze waterstof voor worden gebruikt zoals in kunstmestfabrieken. Waterstof voor personenauto’s is een zinloos idee omdat het extreem inefficient is. Maar dat is inmiddels wel algemeen bekend. Autofabrikanten hebben waterstof daarom gelukkig al lang links laten liggen.
    2
  1155.  @JohnBoonBeanDutchman  Precies.
    2
  1156. It's impressive that they managed to squeeze so many cilinders in a relatively small chunk of metal - the product is obviously an impressive piece of mechanical marvel. On the other hand it frightens me that humanity is still (2019!) putting these hideously inefficient contraptions in vehicles while there has been a much better alternative for a long time.
    2
  1157. 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
  1158. Shell krijgt (net als elk ander energiebedrijf) vele miljoenen aan subsidie per jaar. Voor hernieuwbare projecten kan er tevens extra subsidie ontvangen worden.
    2
  1159. Wrong. Those losses account for both hydrogen and electric vehicles so they do not have to be included.
    2
  1160.  @rexli1887  Please elaborate.
    2
  1161.  @rexli1887  But all the losses after the energy generation stage are incredibly high for hydrogen vehicles.
    2
  1162.  @beaufester9017  Alles wordt gewoon elektrisch.
    2
  1163.  @BigGrizzNYC  Animal agriculture is devastating in many ways and does thus not belong in the 21st century and definitely not in the 22nd.
    2
  1164.  @borgiobesieger2806  Goedzo 👍
    2
  1165.  @borgiobesieger2806  Gewoon een kwestie van wetenschap hoor.
    2
  1166. Yes.
    2
  1167.  @jannikattentater3838  Not really. In many countries hydrogen cars are treated as EVs when it comes to incentives or tax reliefs. Still nobody wants one.
    2
  1168. Exactly. It’s pathetic.
    2
  1169.  @MiesvanderLippe  Mooi verwoord.
    2
  1170. Of course not, eventually diesel will be over.
    2
  1171. Vanzelfsprekend is er niets mis met de mensen zelf. Met de veehouderij echter wel.
    2
  1172.  @Simone-hi9do  Lastig he, de realiteit
    2
  1173.  @Simone-hi9do  Dierenmishandeling heeft niets met politiek te maken. Het hoort gewoon niet thuis in de 21e eeuw.
    2
  1174.  @pin65371  90% of a barrel of crude is used for combustion…
    2
  1175. Klopt prima hoor. Kijk maar eens hoe dik die buizen zijn die de grond in gaan. En je hebt niet alleen een aanvoer nodig, maar ook een retour! Niet te vergelijken met gas- of electriciteitsdistributie dus.
    2
  1176. mario zaal Jawel. Ze dromen juist van waterstof.
    2
  1177. Not at all. Hybrids were cool 20 years ago and hydrogen is a terribly inefficient solution as we all know.
    2
  1178. musa mutlu lekker relevant
    2
  1179. Waarom moet de agent altijd mondeling zijn positie doorgeven? Ik mag aannemen dat de meldkamer via gps de locatie kan volgen?
    2
  1180. echt he
    2
  1181.  @Realist-zp8im  Sagt keine Elektroautofahrer.
    2
  1182.  @BertVanMullem  dank 👍🏻
    2
  1183. Stoer man
    2
  1184.  @princetech5701  😂
    2
  1185. Yes, probably for seasonal storage. Not for day to day stabilisation.
    2
  1186.  @jaycweingardt11  CO2 emissions and bird death rates are not comparable ar all.
    2
  1187. Wrongggg
    2
  1188.  @eFuelsNow  HVO100 kann nie in große Menge produziert werden.
    2
  1189. Candy Staldijk ID3 ;) i3 is van BMW.
    2
  1190. 50 times* but it is not that much of a problem.
    2
  1191.  @koblongata  and tearingly inefficient
    2
  1192.  @H1SCOTTY  Hoe je het ook went of keert, een plantaardig dieet zal uiteindelijk toch altijd winnen qua duurzaamheid. Zelfs als je af en toe vruchten en groenten van ver weg haalt, kom je onder aan de streep op minder CO2-uitstoot uit.
    2
  1193. It changes literally nothing, apart from the energy that comes from the solar panel - but that will be completely negligible.
    2
  1194. Elon doesn’t deserve any kudos anymore
    2
  1195.  @ACGBLR  I am correct
    2
  1196. Ok wappie
    2
  1197. They have been around for decades. Still very inefficient. Batteries are far better and this will always remain so. It's just simple physics.
    2
  1198. Same here.
    2
  1199.  @matthewmarkus2495  1) Subsidies are justified because EVs are less polluting. But yes, it would now be fine to remove subsidies. 2) Famous myth. An EV only requires 10 kWh on average per day. 3) Rarely. They actually store surplus renewables. 4) Actually solar works great, even in non sunny countries. 5) has literally nothing to do with electric drive trains specifically.
    2
  1200.  @matthewmarkus2495  2) Charging at low power does not create any problems with grid load. Also, upgrade of the grid will happen anyway. 3) EVs, duh! There is always an average number of EVs charging, automatically storing renewable energy. 4) denying solar works in 2024 is really dumb. 5) again, same for modern ICE cars. I repeat, it has nothing to do with the drive train.
    2
  1201. Waar haal je die onzin vandaan. Elektrische auto’s zijn vele malen schoner.
    2
  1202. Lol if you are still spreading this kind of BS in 2024 it only proves you never took the slightest effort to inform yourself.
    2
  1203. Yes, batteries are here to stay. Total life cycle emissions of electric cars are many times lower than gasoline or diesel equivalents. Green hydrogen will never play a role in powering consumer products like passenger cars and heating.
    2
  1204. Fast charging takes about 20 minutes in most cases.
    2
  1205. Yup!
    2
  1206. Veel beter voor het milieu dan rijden op benzine en diesel ja.
    2
  1207.  @anoniemw.222  Dat je het ‘heel makkelijk’ kan maken betekent niet dat het efficient is. Dat is het namelijk niet. Verre van zelfs. Daardoor zal het ook altijd veel duurder blijven om op te rijden.
    2
  1208. By far not good enough. Only slightly better than gasoline emission wise.
    2
  1209. Zoek even op what whataboutisme betekent.
    2
  1210.  @gravityskeptic8697  Wie drinkt er nou nog melk? 🤢
    2
  1211.  @REgamesplayer  Was the case with earlier Model 3s. Not been like that for years.
    2
  1212.  @nunyabidness3075  Nope. Plenty of research available. Science is clear. Solar panels EASILY compensate for their emissions. The time it takes definitely varies depending on many factors. That is correct. But we are talking about a range of about 2 to 6 years. They easily last 25 years.
    2
  1213. Of course it was. The faster the EV transition happens, the better.
    2
  1214. Sure, hydrogen may play a role in energy storage. However, that doesn't mean we should put it in cars.
    2
  1215. wronggggggg
    2
  1216.  @C_R_O_M________  whole EV and CO2 thing
    2
  1217.  @C_R_O_M________  EV produce LESS CO2, not 0. Apart from greening CO2 also creates the greenhouse effect. That is the problem.
    2
  1218. You forget that fuel cells degrade as well. In many cases much faster than batteries.
    2
  1219. It’s a great time to be alive.
    2
  1220. How is it possible to turn the steering shaft when the electric motor is not powered? As far as I know worm gears cannot be driven from the gear side.
    2
  1221. It simply wouldn't be enough. CO2 emmissions would still be far too high.
    2
  1222. Fuel cells degrade as well, often faster dan current battery technology. Also, hydrogen cars also have batteries.
    2
  1223. ptronic Because first you would need to make electricity, then create hydrogen by electrolysis, then compress it (several hundreds of bars), then transport it, then store it again, then fuel your car, then convert it to electricity AGAIN, then turn it into mechanical energy.
    2
  1224. Well said
    2
  1225.  @HM-wf7ig  Het is zaak dat we massaal minder vlees en zuivel gaan consumeren, dus laten we maar beginnen met het verminderen van het nationale aanbod. Dat andere landen daar dan pas later achteraan hobbelen is helaas dan maar zo.
    2
  1226. ParrotTube Dat zou zeker een grote stap zijn 👍🏻
    2
  1227.  @neildolan7177  Yes we can. It actually is the least polluting option we have. There is zero reason to postpone.
    2
  1228.  @neildolan7177  There are many options for solar installation locations. Areas that could otherwise be forests should obviously be considered carefully. Of course lowering consumption in general is important too, but that will never result in needing significantly less solar. It first comes down to increasing renewable production as fast as possible. Also: electrification in general results in massive savings in general energy consumption due to far higher efficiency.
    2
  1229. Significantly lowering nitrous oxide emissions can only happen by decreasing the number of livestock.
    2
  1230.  @hersonmartinus7056  Voedingspatronen zijn juist een uitstekend voorbeeld van duurzame oplossingen die zeer betaalbaar zijn. Een plantaardig dieet is per definitie goedkoper.
    2
  1231. Allemaal onzin. Verdiep je eens in de echte cijfers en je zult begrijpen waarom elektrische auto’s de enige fatsoenlijke oplossing zijn om CO2-uitstoot te verlagen.
    2
  1232. CO2
    2
  1233. Lol. Electric is always cleaner.
    2
  1234. Emissions would be at least 5 times higher than an EV due to super low efficiency + NOx emissions from the exhaust. The noise is also a huge downside.
    2
  1235. "You have not factored in the real cost of creating the electricity for EV's." - Not relevant. They both start with the same electricity. "You have not factored in the cost and environmental aspects of the batteries." - Not relevant. He didn't factor in the cost and environmental aspects of the batteries, fuel tanks and fuel cell that go in a hydrogen car either. "Hydrogen costs will plummet drastically once the infrastructure is in place and the numbers grow." - Wrong. Hydrogen will remain VERY inefficient and therefore expensive, no matter the scale.
    2
  1236. Why would it be?
    2
  1237. @ Sure but I doubt it is a 1:1 ratio. Definitely not in Europe.
    2
  1238.  @ThompsonClint  Absolutely. Some will convert to fast chargers, this is already happening in Northern Europe.
    2
  1239. 😂 much less than any gasoline or diesel car.
    2
  1240. You are thinking of Teslas. Plenty of EVs available with LOADS of buttons to press.
    2
  1241. Well said.
    2
  1242. Well said
    2
  1243. Just the grid as we know it. That’s fine. The grid gets greener every year.
    2
  1244. As long as transmission capacity is not expanded, yes.
    2
  1245. Eindelijk een wijze comment.
    2
  1246. Because it is terribly inefficient and therefore not green at all.
    2
  1247. Battery busses are already there, battery trucks are around the corner and trains should simply use overhead lines.
    2
  1248. Er zijn er zat die wel kunnen rekenen.
    2
  1249. They are not. Inform yourself.
    2
  1250. Onzin. In Nederland zitten we al bijna op 10% hernieuwbare energie en in andere Europese landen nog veel hoger. In Europa gemiddeld 18%. Dat is al een significante hoeveelheid en wordt elk jaar meer.
    2
  1251. Yes, FCEVs are always inefficient..
    2
  1252. Zo gaat het altijd met vooruitgang. Uiteindelijk zullen die landen ook strenger omgaan met stikstofuitstoot.
    2
  1253. "expensive and evil in their production process and their co2 balance is worse than those of an regual gas powered car!" wrrronnnngggg. dude how can you be so behind? It's 2024...
    2
  1254.  @eyesodd It’s bullshit.
    2
  1255.  @eyesodd  Of course I did and it exactly proves the opposite of your claim. The cameras are used to lower emissions.
    2
  1256.  @eyesodd  yeah it must all be a conspiracy 😂 Your reasoning makes no sense. Emissions zones are about local pollution like NOx and soot, not CO2. This is directly caused by road traffic.
    2
  1257. Exactly.
    2
  1258. Doesn't change much. Still waaay better.
    2
  1259. Great comment.
    2
  1260. In many European cities you can use AC charging in most streets.
    2
  1261. Hydrogen will never be cheaper because it will always remain inefficient due to physics.
    2
  1262. Weleens van groenten, peulvruchten, granen, noten, fruit en interpunctie gehoord?
    2
  1263. Nee
    2
  1264. Haha yeah. He recently had his Mercedes G Wagon converted to electric too.
    2
  1265. Wrong. Natural gas still emits a lot of CO2. Only slightly less than diesel.
    2
  1266. Sometimes the government buys it, sometimes the farming keeps it for other activities.
    2
  1267. Not really. There will always be an average number of EVs charging at any given moment of the day. Therefore there will be barely any renewable surplus.
    2
  1268. The charging efficiency does not deteriorate. It is the battery capacity that slowly decreases over the years. Modern EV batteries have already fixed this to a very manageable level.
    2
  1269.  @0neofthem  Exactly
    2
  1270. Hydrogen tanks, tubing and the rest of the high pressure system needs to be replaced after a certain number of years.
    2
  1271. A LOT less than any alternative.
    2
  1272.  @cmsstacker123  EV batteries degrade about 2% per year on average. Capacity that is. Not power.
    2
  1273. Not really. You are referring to the Hyundai Nexo. Hyundai says it CLEANS the air by filtering small particles (fine dust) from the air that is sucked through the grill of the car. That has nothing to do with CO2 removal, let alone this could be called ‘negative emissions’ because the CO2 caused by hydrogen production is incredibly high.
    2
  1274.  @EfficientRVer  Exactly
    2
  1275. It is not because it is far less efficient.
    2
  1276.  @dariushober1506  I would love it to work, but it is just simple physics. Of course the vehicle can function during a demonstration, but only as long as the batteries that power the fuel cells are not depleted. That’s all.
    2
  1277.  @dariushober1506  It’s impossible. You cannot create more energy than you started with. The energy that the hydrogen generates by combusting inside the engine can NEVER be more than the electric energy that was used to make it in the first place. Basic thermodynamics.
    2
  1278.  @christianamor8828  Nee, daarmee bedoel ik mensen die simpelweg gefrustreerd zijn omdat bepaalde onderwerpen te ingewikkeld voor ze zijn en er daarom maar van uitgaan dat alle dingen in de wereld die ze niet leuk vinden het gevold zijn van EeN COmplOT!!1.
    2
  1279. LiFePO?
    2
  1280.  @B4nan0n  Lifepo4 is nice. Just built a little setup myself.
    2
  1281.  Supertech  That was fake news. It takes about 50.000 kilometers to make up for battery production emissions. So about three years.
    2
  1282. 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
  1283. Keeping and driving a combustion engine car for a few years is worse than manufacturing and driving a brand new EV.
    2
  1284.  @alexthebruh  exactly
    2
  1285.  @Smaakpolitie  want?
    2
  1286. Except that energy density of LH2 is a lot worse than LNG.
    2
  1287.  @cam5955  All wrong. Inform yourself.
    2
  1288. So cool!
    2
  1289. Wrong. Electric is always cleaner.
    2
  1290. Still cleaner than diesel. That is why electrification always makes sense.
    2
  1291. It actually is a great solution.
    2
  1292. Emissions are quite low already. About 100 kg of CO2 per kWh.
    2
  1293. Hydrogen combustion is terribly inefficient + you would still need gigantic pressure vessels to store the hydrogen. And no, onboard electrolysis cannot be done without an external power source.
    2
  1294. Er zijn genoeg ondernemers die wel kunnen rekenen hoor.
    2
  1295. Yes, Cybervan would be absolutely fabulous.
    2
  1296.  @Rudra-mm1qf  Construction cost, construction time, operating cost, waste management, dependency of countries like Russia, China and Kazakhstan for uranium.
    2
  1297. It does indeed. What a time to be alive.
    2
  1298. Veehouderij opdoeken a.u.b.
    2
  1299. Ed je Als je zelf effe nadenkt dan besef je dat het een uitstekend idee is.
    2
  1300. En bovendien: uitstoot is altijd lager bij elektrisch.
    2
  1301. SocialHostage Neehoor. Dat is een hardnekkig misverstand. In Nederland is de gemiddelde CO2-uitstoot 450 gram per kWh. Dat is dus circa 90 gram per kilometer. Dat haal je met geen enkele benzine/diesel/lpg-auto. En verder over LPG: de CO2 uit-stoot is inderdaad iets lager (10%) maar de stikstof- en fijnstofuitstoot is juist hoger dan bij een benzineauto.
    2
  1302. You also like the idea of an energy consumption that is three times as high?
    2
  1303. There is no such thing as morally good meat.
    2
  1304. Leuk voor een paar niche-toepassingen, maar voor personenauto’s nutteloos en verspillend.
    2
  1305. Not at all.
    2
  1306.  @janreitsma1096  Waterstof is veel te inefficiënt. Je hebt circa drie keer zoveel elektriciteit nodig om waterstof door middel van elektrolyse op te wekken om dezelfde afstand af te kunnen leggen als een auto met een accu. Door die inefficiëntie wordt het ook nog eens heel duur aan de pomp. Tevens zijn auto's met een brandstofcel ook uitgerust met een behoorlijke accu om piekvermogen te kunnen leveren en opslaan. De brandstofcel zelf bevat overigens ook 'zeldzame' materialen. Het verbranden van waterstof in een verbrandingsmotor is al helemaal hopeloos inefficiënt.
    2
  1307. For certain things yes, not for passenger cars.
    2
  1308. @Eufor Here Gras zijn geen planten wilde je zeggen? xD
    2
  1309.  @champanzee6486  CO2 is the problem.
    2
  1310.  @kimmer6  The whole point is that the total impact of those things is a lot less than fossil alternatives. Why is that so hard to understand?
    2
  1311. Hadden ze maar een bedrijf moeten beginnen dat wel in de 21e eeuw thuishoort.
    2
  1312. Factory farming is harmful in many ways, emissions are just one of them.
    2
  1313. Gelukkig zijn er nog mensen met verstand. Jij slaat de spijker op z’n kop 👍🏻
    2
  1314. Falsch
    2
  1315. No hub motors.
    2
  1316.  @glitcherPROXx  They are absolutely not fine as we all know.
    2
  1317. It’s not biased because both hydrogen and EVs start with the same electricity. It’s not relevant what happens before that step.
    2
  1318. Hydrogen cars have lithium-ion batteries and platinum fuel cells. They consume three times the amount of electricity compared to an EV. They clearly are not more environmentally friendly.
    2
  1319.  @sebastiangruenfeld141  They still have batteries on board.
    2
  1320. Hydrogen is not a viable option for passenger cars.
    2
  1321. It is.
    2
  1322.  @penskepc2374  Governments wouldn’t allow that
    2
  1323.  @salvadorcoling8403  Exactly
    2
  1324.  @april.2332  De veehouderij is nooit goed voor dieren. In geen enkel land.
    2
  1325.  @GTfour01  uitstekend argument
    2
  1326.  @ry4743  Je hebt er duidelijk nog nooit fatsoenlijk over nagedacht. Het gaat erom dat de koeien niet geboren worden. Het is immers een kunstmatig proces en heeft niets met natuur te maken.
    2
  1327.  @ry4743  Nogmaals, je hebt duidelijk geen flauw idee. Vee zou het beste niet bestaan inderdaad. Je doet dieren er immers geen plezier mee om ze een leven in de veehouderij te geven. De dieren zouden niet bestaan als de veehouderij niet bestond, dat is het hele punt... En nee, de dieren hoeven niet vroegtijdig te worden afgeslacht want de overgang naar een wereld zonder veehouderij is een langzaam proces. Bovendien leven dieren in de veehouderij sowieso maar kort. En slimmerik, verreweg de meeste soja wordt gebruikt voor veevoer, niet voor menselijke consumptie. Ophouden met de veehouderij is de enige optie die er is om het klimaat-, en stikstofprobleem op te lossen en dierenleed te voorkomen.
    2
  1328.  @MrWaheedulHaque  Hahaha
    2
  1329.  @MultiMartien  Het ontbreekt u duidelijk aan enig wetenschappelijk besef.
    2
  1330. It’s not junk.
    2
  1331.  @Jasred263  Won’t take long.
    2
  1332.  @MDC_1985  You missed the countless VW Polos, Opel Corsas, Ford Fiestas, Renault Clios, Toyota Yaris, Seat Ibizas, Skoda Fabias on the road when you were in the UK, France, Germany and Spain? These are all very popular cars and are all a lot shorter than the Model 3.
    2
  1333. Weight barely influences energy consumption. By the way, fuel cell vehicles are about as heavy.
    2
  1334. Well explained Casper.
    2
  1335.  @abvanos530  60
    2
  1336. Because it is incredibly inefficient.
    2
  1337.  @dean1100110  It is clear that EVs will be cheaper than internal combustion engine cars within this decade. Also, we simply cannot afford to waste insane amounts of renewable energy on hydrogen combustion for a very long time - it would actually slow down the energy transition. Also, ICE require a lot more maintenance which also adds a lot in cost. Plus: combusting hydrogen still causes NOx emissions. Last but not least: high pressure hydrogen tanks and the control system is expensive to produce and does not last forever.
    2
  1338. Ooit nagedacht over de kosten op de samenleving als gevolg van het verbranden van fossiele brandstoffen in dichtbevolkt gebied?
    2
  1339.  @Daeva83B  Met de stikstofuitstoot is het ook vrij slecht gesteld :(
    2
  1340. Electric cars are always cleaner than diesel or gasoline equivalents. They get even better every year as the grid gradually shifts to more renewables.
    2
  1341. Mit DC lader kann man einfach das vielfache pro Tag fahren.
    2
  1342.  TrendingTuber  Blijkbaar nog steeds je huiswerk niet gedaan.
    2
  1343. Well said. It baffles me that even in 2022 many people believe in the magical hydrogen stories.
    2
  1344. Yes it is really poor reporting
    2
  1345. Uiteraard, het gaat hier om reguliere gezondheidszorg.
    2
  1346. Nee
    2
  1347. Lol hybrid is a joke in 2020. Fully electric is the only sensible thing to do.
    2
  1348. Those conversion losses are NOTHING compared to all the steps that hydrogen has to go through.
    2
  1349. Er is enorm veel bewuste onwetendheid in de comments inderdaad..
    2
  1350.  @opoxious1592  Genoeg leuke elektrische occasions op de markt tegenwoordig hoor.
    2
  1351. Smerig he 😵‍💫
    2
  1352. Thoriumcentrales bestaan nog laaaaang niet. Duurt meerdere decennia. Veel te laat dus.
    2
  1353. Not at all.
    2
  1354.  @tejarshihardas8707  Everything has a carbon footprint lol That’s not the point.
    2
  1355.  @JigRaw  Nee, stikstof is een probleem in Nederland omdat er heel veel veehouders op één plek zitten. Spreiding lost het probleem dus wel degelijk op. Maar stoppen met vlees- en zuivelconsumptie is uiteraard nog vele malen beter.
    2
  1356. Onzin. Als we onze vlees- en zuivelconsumptie terugdringen kunnen we af met veel minder landbouw.
    2
  1357. Most EVs are very safe and reliable
    2
  1358. Laurens Peek Nee. Waterstof is enorme verspilling. Zonne- en windenergie moet je zo direct mogelijk gebruiken.
    2
  1359. Het is een probleem in Nederland omdat er extreem veel veeteelt op een extreem klein stukje land bestaat. Dat doet zich niet voor in Duitsland.
    2
  1360. Which is fine. Products with a lower impact will be cheaper.
    2
  1361. Misschien een goed moment om sowieso met caravans te stoppen, of in ieder geval met de grote exemplaren.
    2
  1362. De hoogste tijd om de veehouderij te halveren. En dan nog een keer.
    2
  1363. That is the plan, but it takes time to expand transmission capacity
    2
  1364. It's not. Lithium mining is not invasive. Look up brine lakes.
    2
  1365.  @vaniljuhvla9367  Zo simpel is het allemaal niet. Kerncentrales zijn ontzettend duur en kosten veel meer tijd on te bouwen, los van het afvalprobleem uiteraard. Ook ben je voor uranium afhankelijk van een select aantal landen. Kernenergie zal een rol spelen, maar het is geen realistische optie om windmolens te vervangen.
    2
  1366.  @philiplmoore3995  Trying to harvest energy back with a windmill on the roof of a driving car is pretty much the same.
    2
  1367.  @philiplmoore3995  Yes it is. A wind turbine on a car increases drag and thus energy consumption. You can never get more energy back than you put into it.
    2
  1368. hamobu And that is exactly what is happening. Increasing charge power fills up EV batteries faster and thus preventing them from needing to charge at a later moment. Energy is literally stored that otherwise would have been wasted.
    2
  1369. hamobu It doesn’t matter. Energy gets stored.
    2
  1370. Obviously the ultimate plan still is EV
    2
  1371. De cijfers zijn anders. Het prototype kan op een dag ongeveer 250 liter waterstof produceren. Het gaat echter om het gewicht, niet om volume. 250 liter is onder normale druk 22 gram waterstof. Dat is vrij weinig.
    2
  1372. Not relevant!
    2
  1373. Lithium mining is not invasive nor energy intense.
    2
  1374. But it requires A LOT of energy to harvest these H-atoms.
    2
  1375. Wrong
    2
  1376. sporthorses Yara Origineel 😂
    2
  1377. wrong and you know it
    2
  1378.  @jaredssouth8619  So what? That doesn’t mean it is worse than crude oil production, refinement and combustion.
    2
  1379. Except that used batteries won’t be dumped.
    2
  1380. Zou enorm dom zijn.
    2
  1381. De veehouderij is ook een enorme vervuiler dus moet zo snel mogelijk gestopt worden. We kunnen prima zonder vlees en zuivel. Een wereld zonder staal is echter onmogelijk.
    2
  1382.  @wramerdammilot8766  Precies! Moet je nagaan hoe klein de kans op trombose is. En natuurlijke immuniteit is leuk inderdaad, alleen kan de zorg het niet aan als we het virus doodleuk laten rondgaan zoals je weet.
    2
  1383.  @oegromov  Precies, en daarom is het zo belangrijk om die laatste kleine groep ook te vaccineren. Dat scheelt bijna 50% ziekenhuisbezetting.
    2
  1384.  @StripeDeStripper  Je vergeet even dat we recentelijk bijna alle maatregelen hebben losgelaten in vergelijking met een jaar eerder. Dat zorgt voor dat grote verschil. En nee, ik zeg niet dat ongevaccineerden dé oorzaak zijn maar het zou wel een groot verschil maken als ze zich wel zouden vaccineren. Dat is gewoon een feit. Natuurlijke immuniteit is inderdaad ook een degelijke oplossing, maar dan moeten mensen wel zo verspreid mogelijk (over de tijd) besmet raken en niet heel veel tegelijk zoals nu. Die spreiding is alleen uit te voeren door middel van dempende oplossingen zoals maatregelen en vaccinaties.
    2
  1385. braunblender I honestly don’t think so. I do understand why using fire can be romantic or nostalgic, but I do not see the need to keep distributing this through an whole country for this purpose. My country (The Netherlands) is finally slowly moving away from the national NG network. Most new houses do not get a connection anymore and I think that is a good thing. Current NG networks can indeed be made suitable for hydrogen, but it does require quite a lot of adjustment to the systems and pipelines themselves.
    2
  1386. Uitstekende link.
    2
  1387.  @explorinlearnindoing5462  Nee juist niet. In het verleden werd Elon inderdaad vaak onterecht in een kwaad daglicht geplaatst door verschillende media. De ellende van de laatste paar jaar heeft hij allemaal zelf veroorzaakt door bijna dagelijks zijn dwaze ideeën, complottheorieën en andere onzin te posten op zijn eigen private media outlet.
    2
  1388. Carolien Nee, gewoon geen brandstoffen.
    2
  1389. Carolien Klopt, maar sommige biobrandstoffen zijn op andere manieren weer zeer schadelijk.
    2
  1390.  @CarsofGlasgow  Yeah I love it
    2
  1391. Onzin. Elektrische auto's staan niet onder stroom bij een ongeluk.
    2
  1392.  @MariaJose-oh5yh  There is no acid in lithium batteries.
    2
  1393. Also regarding slavery: you are probably referring to cobalt. Yes, a minority of all the cobalt produced in the world is related to questionable practices like child labour and / or slavery. Cobalt is often a component in lithium ion batteries that are used in EVs but also in countless other electrical appliances that rely on these kind of batteries. Apart from that, the oil industry is still one of the biggest consumers of cobalt because this material is used in the desulphurisation process of petrol and diesel. Electric cars do use certain amounts of cobalt, but they are definitely not the sole consumer of this material nor are they directly relatable to slavery or child labour.
    2
  1394. Completely incomparable.
    2
  1395. Hier zit een motor in grapjas
    2
  1396. You are wrong but you know that.
    2
  1397. It's insane that we have already come so far that a petrol version and an electric version of the same car are SO close to each other in purchase price. This was unthinkable only a few years ago.
    2
  1398.  @voornaam8213  Inderdaad.
    2
  1399.  @AjaxAwaydays  Uitstekend plan
    2
  1400.  @SimonsAstronomy  Lol there you go again, 0 facts.
    2
  1401.  @evlo8059  Are you sure this is hydrogen? Sounds very unlikely.
    2
  1402. CNG and LNG are fossil fuels.
    2
  1403. Not at all. It’s super inefficient and super expensive.
    2
  1404.  @ericg4625  Het produceren en opslaan van duurzame waterstof kan helemaal niet goedkoop en maar in beperkte mate schoon. Doordat rijden op waterstof zo ontzettend inefficient is, heb je altijd drie keer zo veel elektrische energie nodig als een normale elektrische auto. Netverzwaring is inderdaad nodig, maar dit is normaal. Het net is altijd in de loop der decennia verzwaard en is bovendien veel beter uitvoerbaar dan het optuigen van een waterstofinfrastructuur. En ja, waterstof voor personenauto's is, na jaren van prototypes en experimenten, nu echt een gepasseerd station. VW-Baas Herbert Diess vorige maand: 'waterstof is simpelweg onzin': https://www.wiwo.de/unternehmen/auto/iaa2019/iaa-vw-chef-herbert-diess-ueber-wasserstoff-autos-das-ist-einfach-unsinn-/25009062.html
    2
  1405. Eric Geerts Eric Geerts Waterstof is maar in beperkte mate schoon omdat er bij lange na niet genoeg duurzame energie is (de komende decennia) om het groen te produceren. Waterstof door gasleidingen zou wellicht kunnen, maar dit gaat om woningen, niet om tankstations. En wat bedoel je met dat zonnepaneel? Het zou een ontzettende verspilling van (dat beetje) energie zijn om het om te gaan zetten naar waterstof waardoor je er nooit een fatsoenlijke afstand mee kan afleggen. Al sinds de jaren 80 denkt men dat waterstof ‘wel eens de toekomst zou kunnen zijn’. Het is echter nog altijd niet van de grond gekomen omdat het simpelweg te inefficient is. Hierdoor is het voorbijgestreefd door de lithium-ionaccu’s waardoor waterstof gewoonweg geen interessante optie meer is.
    2
  1406. Eric Geerts Ik zie inderdaad liever veel laadpalen in het straatbeeld dan dat we overstappen op een intrinsiek inefficient systeem. Files bij snelladers is een mythe. Stel dat een gemiddelde laadsessie 20 minuten duurt, dat is slechts 4 keer zo lang als een tankbeurt. Dan heb je dus slechts 4 keer zo veel laadpunten op een parkeerplaats nodig als we nu pompen hebben. Dit is overigens te veel, want de meeste mensen laden ruim 80% van de tijd thuis, waardoor bijladen langs de snelweg minder gebeurt dan er nu wordt getankt. Dan de prijs: dit zal altijd duurder blijven dan laden omdat je drie keer zoveel energie nodig hebt om dezelfde afstand af te leggen als een accu-auto. Groene waterstof zal in de toekomst een plek krijgen bij seizoensopslag van elektriciteit en bij industriele toepassingen waar nu enorme hoeveelheden grijze waterstof gebruikt worden (kunstmest- en metaal-productie). Rijden op waterstof is compleet nutteloos en vooral verspilling.
    2
  1407. The vast majority of legacy automakers has also quit hydrogen activities.
    2
  1408. Uitstekend nieuws. Uitkopen die hap.
    2
  1409. Why do you think your comment is relevant?!
    2
  1410.  @wolverineqtg976 What do you mean by ‘nothing changes’?
    2
  1411.  @bigbrisk8423  Lol you have to pay.
    2
  1412. It's not.
    2
  1413.  @That-Guy_ Exactly!
    2
  1414. Exactly.
    2
  1415.  @buildmotosykletist1987  Does not make it any less of a scam. Hydrogen does not make sense from a physics point of view.
    2
  1416. Hydrogen cars are barely lighter than EVs. Batteries are FAR more efficient and less carbon intense during their entire lifespan.
    2
  1417. You have no clue. Catalytic converters do not filter CO2.
    2
  1418. Haha en hoe wou jij waterstof creëren?
    2
  1419. lol of course not. Diesel is dead.
    2
  1420. Wederom een teken aan de wand dat de veehouderij zo snel mogelijk opgedoekt moet worden.
    2
  1421. Echt origineel man
    2
  1422. And even then it is a terrible waste of that precious renewable energy.
    2
  1423. Genau!
    2
  1424. You are clueless
    2
  1425. Wat een onzin en bovendien een klassiek gevalletje whataboutisme. Weleens gehoord van de grote hoeveelheden kobalt die de olieindustrie gebruikt om brandstoffen te ontzwavelen? Bovendien kun je gewoon elektrische auto’s met een LFP-accu kopen.
    2
  1426.  @MiguelGLD  precies.
    2
  1427. 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
  1428.  @fakeis200300  You are right. Japan is a left hand drive country. China is not.
    2
  1429. Sehr gut!
    2
  1430. There we go again 🤦🏻‍♂️
    2
  1431. kWh 😊
    2
  1432. In Europe the Ducato (Promaster) box truck is used for this purpose. They often have a sleep cabin on top of it.
    2
  1433.  @ROSNADOR  Read again
    2
  1434. Verdiep je er nou eens in jongen, voordat je nog een keer van dit soort onzin de wereld in slingert.
    2
  1435. ​ @MotorMaus01  Doet allemaal niet ter zaken. Zelfs als je je elektrische auto altijd oplaadt met de grijste grijze stroom die je kunt vinden rijdt je schoner dan welke benzine- of dieselauto dan ook. Daar gaat het om.
    2
  1436.  @MotorMaus01  Ik had het over grijze stroom van energiecentrales. En nee, het maakt niet uit waar de stroom vandaan komt. Natuurlijk, hoe groener de stroom hoe beter, maar nogmaals: zelfs op grijze stroom rijdt je schoner dan welke diesel of benzine dan ook. Dan nog die andere mythe over 'lithium'. Wederom blijkt dat je je niet hebt ingelezen want lithium komt niet uit Afrika. Jij bent in de war met kobalt. Kobalt wordt al sinds jaar en dag in de olieindustrie gebruikt om elke liter benzine of diesel die in je auto gaat te reinigen. En ja er gaat ook kobalt in telefoons, laptops, computers en elektrische auto's. Het aandeel kobalt in accu's gaat echter steeds verder naar beneden en zal in de toekomst tot het verleden behoren. Elektrische auto's hebben dus niet zo veel met kobalt te maken - en zeker niet meer dan auto's op diesel of benzine. Dus ik zeg weer: lees je eens fatsoenlijk in. Je praat alleen maar nepnieuws na en draagt er ook nog eens aan bij door het doodleuk hier in de comments te slingeren.
    2
  1437.  @user-xk6hr7bc5v  Sorry, yes you are right. What I meant is that sinterklaas is not celebrated to purposely spread racist ideas, but the way it is (or was until recently in most areas) done creates racist associations.
    2
  1438.  @user-xk6hr7bc5v  If I wasn’t clear enough: I am a big proponent of changing sinterklaas and absolutely against maintaining zwarte piet in every way possible.
    2
  1439.  @JohnBeerschoten  Because some people are simply too dumb to realize.
    2
  1440. It’s just the best option we have. Anything has their effects on the environment.
    2
  1441. Exactly, you nailed it.
    2
  1442. Haha exactly
    2
  1443.  @danielbjors8460  It's the only sensible future for vehicles.
    2
  1444.  @AndrewTSq  Impossible. 0,3 usd / 6 km = 0,05 usd per km. That is impossble to beat with any diesel or petrol car, let alone with Scandinavian fuel prices.
    2
  1445. Yes they are.
    2
  1446.  @Skreebee  They absolutely are compared to gasoline and diesel vehicles.
    2
  1447. It wasn't solved at all. It's a famous scam and has nothing to do with the above.
    2
  1448.  @Robert-j6r8c  Of course the Semi is coming. First few are being delivered to Pepsi now.
    2
  1449.  @lbochtler  Incorrect. All your questions have been answered years ago in scientific reports. All the data is there and easy to find. Conclusions are clear: electric vehicles are far less polluting or harmful for our planet than diesel and gasoline vehicles. Of course the grid needs to be upgraded but it is more than worth it. Electrification is the only option we have to significantly lower CO2 emissions fast. A vehicle using synthetic fuel literally requires 5 times as much electric energy simply because of physics. It is horribly inefficient - even worse than hydrogen fuel cell.
    2
  1450. Fun fact: voor het raffineren van diesel en benzine worden grote hoeveelheid van precies diezelfde kobalt gebruikt.
    2
  1451. Hallo?
    2
  1452. Kilowatt-hour*
    2
  1453. Proper LEDs don’t and it has nothing to do with the age of the house.
    2
  1454. Veehouders hoeven niet met rust gelaten te worden, akkerbouwers wel inderdaad.
    2
  1455. Zizi Essal7ie Je hebt je duidelijk nooit verdiept in de effecten van het delven, raffineren en transporteren van aardolieproducten.
    2
  1456. Lithium is not something to worry about. Battery production is currently at an average of 65 kg of CO2 per kWh. This will decline the coming years.
    2
  1457. Bedroevend slechte rapportage inderdaad.
    2
  1458. Everybody knows that, it is no secret. In fact it is the best way to spend oil money ever.
    2
  1459.  @montana1636  "No one produces hydrogen by steam reforming anymore" source please
    2
  1460. EVs genereally perform very well in crash tests.
    2
  1461.  @thetide1070  Sounds like a very professional assessment 😂
    2
  1462. De meeste elektrische auto's kunnen tegenwoordig ruim 300 kilometer rijden en dan in een half uurtje opladen. Waterstof zal altijd extreem inefficiënt en daardoor duur blijven.
    2
  1463.  @S1eepers  sure, but that is a tiny, tiny part. 90%+ of all crude is simply burned.
    2
  1464.  @S1eepers  You are worried about that 10%?!
    2
  1465.  @S1eepers  Like I said, it will be tiny.
    2
  1466. Wrong. It doesn't matter electric cars are not zero emission (nothing is). What counts is that it is A LOT less than any diesel or gasoline car.
    2
  1467. Nobody needs hydrogen cars.
    2
  1468. In the Netherlands cars are taxed by weight. Therefore driving a compact car can save you a lot of money each month.
    2
  1469. Wat bedoel je? Getijdenenergie?
    2
  1470. Precies dit.
    2
  1471. Solar has already become massively cheaper.
    2
  1472. Well said
    2
  1473. En terecht. Vervuilende producten als vlees moeten veel duurder worden.
    2
  1474. Me too 😀
    2
  1475. Better get used to it
    2
  1476. Op de akkerbouw zeker, maar de veehouderij is niks om trots op te zijn.
    2
  1477. Liza Poorters Nee natuurlijk niet, ik eet geen zuivel.
    2
  1478. Halveren die hap.
    2
  1479.  @spaceman4294  EV's are the best. Hydrogen will be controlled by oil companies who prefer to maintain the status quo.
    2
  1480. All refueling stations I have seen don’t have own electrolyzers. Hydrogen is delivered by trucks.
    2
  1481.  @Fosten12  Wieso? Wasserstoff verbrennen ist einfach dumm.
    2
  1482. Whataboutisme
    2
  1483. sjoerd appelman jij snapt het
    2
  1484.  @ragnar254  Akkerbouwers hebben we inderdaad nodig. Veehouders niet.
    2
  1485.  @ragnar254  Wie eet er nou dode dieren?
    2
  1486. Als iets recyclebaar is, is het nog niet per se rendabel.
    2
  1487. Voor akkerbouwers ja.
    2
  1488. Incorrect. Study some thermodynamics and you will soon realize combustion engines will never become considerably more efficient than they are today.
    2
  1489. Hoe minder vissers hoe beter 👍🏻
    2
  1490. Still much cleaner than diesel.
    2
  1491. Moeilijk he statistiek.
    2
  1492.  @maxbagchus6734  Nogmaals, je bent duidelijk niet op de hoogte van de cijfers.
    2
  1493. Sure, but even then large numbers of electric trucks are required.
    2
  1494.  @daffymore  Die accu's worden gewoon hergebruikt en uiteindelijk gerecycled. Ze zitten immers propvol waardevolle materialen.
    2
  1495. Dairy does not make sense in the 21st century. I hope the industry dies off soon.
    2
  1496. what are you trying to say?
    2
  1497. Thankfully there is a wide variety of manufacturers to choose from.
    2
  1498. ICEs are history soon. Get over it.
    2
  1499. Yeah Rosie is great.
    2
  1500.  @hydrolifetech7911  exactly
    2
  1501. Echt lachwekkend inderdaad.
    2
  1502. That is not the case.
    2
  1503.  @lopardie  Driving electric is always the least polluting option. Even when the electricity comes from fossil sources.
    2
  1504. Zelfs al rijd je op grijze stroom, de uitstoot is sowieso lager. Met de Nederlandse energiemix heb je na 30.000 a 50.000 km de productieuitstoot van de accu gecompenseerd.
    2
  1505.  @hilleoomen2603  Hoezo? Iedereen toch? Gemiddeld 13k per jaar per Nederlander.
    2
  1506.  @wesselwanders  Lager dan een vergelijkbaar model op benzine of diesel. En dat over schone lucht en dieselmotoren is de grootste onzin ooit. Er zijn inderdaad bepaalde motoren met dergelijk goede reiniging dat de lucht uit de uitlaat iets minder vies is dan erin ging. Dit geldt echter alleen in omgevingen waar al heel vieze lucht aanwezig is.
    2
  1507. All kinds of cars should be electric.
    2
  1508. Nope
    2
  1509.  @slappevaatdoek  In de realiteit is het verschil veel kleiner dan 30%.
    2
  1510. Why? Most people go plant based because of the ethical and environmental issues, not because they don’t like the taste and texture of animal products.
    2
  1511. Text book example of vocal fry.
    2
  1512. Nope. Hydrogen will never catch up to batteries and there won’t be a need to anyway.
    2
  1513. Ja vet erg man, vergeleken met de miljoen dieren die elke dag in Nederland vermoord worden.
    2
  1514.  @rekhakuttappa5120  I just explained to John why that was not the case.
    2
  1515.  @jonasweber9408  Exactly.
    2
  1516. And that's where the advantages stop..
    2
  1517. Both types of vehicles start with electricity...
    2
  1518.  @nononsense5786  Nope it’s not.
    2
  1519.  @Alien-mu7ex Elektrische Radiatoren haha, genau das zeigt das sie überhaupt keine Ahnung haben worüber sie reden.
    2
  1520.  @Alien-mu7ex  Natürlich kenne ich die. Vier mal ineffizienter als Wärmepumpe 😂
    2
  1521.  @goldenlight1922  Dat heeft letterlijk niets met elkaar te maken.
    2
  1522. Not necessary. There is barely any difference in efficiency within the rpm band. Also, adding gears increases mechanical friction and rotational mass.
    2
  1523. Uitkopen is hartstikke acceptabel.
    2
  1524.  @leendertwassenaar1934  Als ik een vervuilend bedrijf zou hebben zou ik me graag laten uitkopen.
    2
  1525.  @Waterdiver3900  Als jij denkt dat het de regering om iets anders gaat ben je een wappie.
    2
  1526.  @Waterdiver3900  Dat zei ik, duidelijk een wappie
    2
  1527.  @Waterdiver3900  Wederom aannames gebaseerd op onwetendheid. Je probeert een fenomeen te verklaren zonder je te verdiepen in de cijfers. De oppervlakte van Nederland wordt voor 50% besteed aan landbouw en voor slechts 13% aan woningen. Vrijgekomen landbouwgrond wordt niet volgebouwd. Dat is gewoon regelrechte onzin. Ik citeer ‘De maatregel gerichte opkoop is gericht op duurzame natuurverbetering’. Woningbouw veroorzaakt juist stikstof dus dat is uitgesloten. En zelfs als er ooit wel kleine gedeeltes daarvan aan woningbouw worden besteed is daar helemaal niets mis mee. Het is alleen onzin om te denken dat vrijgekomen grond per definitie aan woningbouw wordt besteed.
    2
  1528. Get your numbers straight. Only 24% coal in Germany. EVs are much cleanER. That’s the whole point. Nothing is 100% harmless, the thing is just to chose for the least harmful option - which EVs obviously are.
    2
  1529.  @troyheffernan1261  Again, it is terribly inefficient compared to electric motors and batteries. Unfortunately rockets require combustion so in that case it is acceptable.
    2
  1530.  @troyheffernan1261 I quote: "The 1016-mile range of the XP-1 is possible due to a bigger hydrogen tank than other hydrogen-powered vehicles such as the Toyota Mirai, or the Honda Clarity." So that does not make it efficient at all.
    2
  1531. Het probleem met waterstof is dat het enorm inefficiënt is (al helemaal als je erop gaat rijden) waardoor het per kilometer heel duur zal blijven. Los daarvan is het natuurlijk een verspilling van schaarse duurzame energie waardoor de klimaatdoelen minder snel gehaald zullen worden.
    2
  1532. Lastig he, de realiteit.
    2
  1533. Tja, wat is gelukkig en hoe weet je dat? Uiteindelijk gaat het erom of de dieren uit vrije wil voor een leven in de dierentuin zouden kiezen.
    2
  1534. Nee jonge
    2
  1535.  @nickrijnberg9345  na zo'n 40.000 km ben je de benzineauto al voorbij.
    2
  1536. Still much better than hydrogen.
    2
  1537. Veeteelt opdoeken aub.
    2
  1538.  @Tiger200-po4xc  Wenn du in 2024 wirklich glaubst das ich falsch bin dann willst du dich einfach nicht informieren. Alle Wissenschaftliche Infos kann mann einfach online finden.
    2
  1539.  @moos7005  Er valt weinig meer te verbeteren aan het rendement van de benzinemotor.
    2
  1540.  @saulgoodman2018 Night time electricity consumption is nothing compared to daytime. The sun is gone so ACs and fridges have to work less hard. It has everything to do with peak load. EV charging happens at low power and an average EV will only need about 10 kWh per day max.
    2
  1541. There is no lack of energy at all. It will just be a matter of spreading out the loads, which is easy. An average EV needs less than 10 kWh per day.
    2
  1542. Yes it is a free market, but it is important to chose a solution that is as efficient as possible in order to lower emissions as best as we can. The difference in efficiency and emissions between gasoline an diesel is much smaller than the difference between BEV and HFCEV so that analogy does not make much sense. Also, there is a lot of public money involved in expensive developments like these so we need to make a sane decision. The inability for many people to charge overnight should not be solved by developing a highly complicated and cumbersome hydrogen ecosystem, but simply by installing chargers at car parkings.
    2
  1543. NPAMike True, but it is definitely doable. The city I live in (and many other cities in Europe) are already heavily investing in along the street chargers. Don’t forget, selling kilowatthours is a profit making activity and the costs of these kind of slow chargers is not that high. Also, electrical infrastructure is often already there for lamp posts et cetera. If we would choose for hydrogen cars instead, countries would have to build three times the amount of power stations / solar panels / wind turbines to make up for the enormous amount of energy needed to create all that hydrogen.
    2
  1544.  @SeattlePioneer  Electrons are even more available.
    2
  1545. Of course not.
    2
  1546. kWh
    2
  1547. Elektrisch is altijd schoner dan het alternatief. Dus zelfs als je altijd op grijze stroom rijdt is de uitstoot per kilometer lager.
    2
  1548.  @denr9577  Dat is een heel ander vraagstuk, jij had het over het opwekken van elektriciteit. Maar goed. Je bent in de war met kobalt. Lithium wordt voor het overgrote deel verkregen uit zoutmeren door middel van verdamping. Dit zijn grootschalige industriële processen, hier komen weinig handen aan te pas - laat staan kinderhanden. Een klein gedeelte van de op de markt beschikbare kobalt komt inderdaad uit twijfelachtige bronnen. De hoeveelheid kobalt in accu's wordt echter steeds minder en zal op termijn volledig verdwijnen. Bij raffinageprocessen voor benzine en diesel wordt echter sinds jaar en dag gebruik gemaakt van grote hoeveelheden kobalt. En vergeet verder niet de desastreuze gevolgen in het algemeen van het winnen, transporteren, verwerken en verbranden van aardolieproducten. Dus ja, elektrisch rijden is vele malen beter dan het alternatief.
    2
  1549. 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
  1550. De kalfjes hadden überhaupt niet in het leven geroepen moeten worden. Stoppen met melk drinken dus.
    2
  1551. Nope, also trucks will be battery electric.
    2
  1552. You have clearly no clue about batteries.
    2
  1553.  @Reddylion  jup
    2
  1554.  @Johanneslol11  Zouden ze dan niet aflossen?
    2
  1555. Nee
    2
  1556. JustLeon05 Veeteelt kunnen we best missen hoor.
    2
  1557. Thor Jacobs Die 95% worden er gelukkig steeds minder.
    2
  1558. m-nno hollyday Dat is ook een goed idee inderdaad.
    2
  1559.  @gideon7840  It will be a matter of reuse and eventually recycling. They are full of valuable materials.
    2
  1560. Wrongggggg
    2
  1561. No, it would not boost the efficiency. The low efficiency is caused by the losses during electrolysis, compression, transport en conversion in the fuel cell.
    2
  1562. People will if they are cheap enough
    2
  1563. Veehouderij is geen natuur grapjas
    2
  1564. henny jr Dieren gebruiken voor voedselproductie = dierenmishandeling. Zo simpel is het. Verder is vlees en zuivel de minst efficient manier om de wereld te voeden. Daarom moet het zo snel mogelijk gestopt worden.
    2
  1565. henny jr Vlees en zuivel kunnen niet bestaan zonder dierenleed. Denk daar maar eens over na. Koemelk is voor kalfjes. Niet voor mensen. Niet voor babies.
    2
  1566. Blah b Er worden elke dag 1,5 miljoen dieren per dag geslacht en dan noem je mij extreem 😂
    2
  1567. Jasmine Eindelijk een nuttige comment 👍🏻
    2
  1568. Japan imports massive amounts of H2 by shipping it from Australia where it is made from coal.
    2
  1569. Exactly.
    2
  1570. @ Dat is een vraag.
    2
  1571. But it is horribly inefficient
    2
  1572.  @IM024  Het antwoord is dat je niet hebt opgelet bij natuurkunde.
    2
  1573. Genau!
    2
  1574. Too heavy, too big and unnecessary. Current EVs can already do 500 to 600 km.
    2
  1575. Guess what, they already exist.
    2
  1576. Dick van Aggelen Lekker scherp verhaal man.
    2
  1577. Haha dus als het je niet bevalt is het opeens ongeloofwaardig 😂
    2
  1578.  @samderealist4224  Dat is letterlijk wat er staat.
    2
  1579. It’s still wasteful, green or not.
    2
  1580. But we have far too many pigs and chickens on earth. Livestock numbers need to drastically decrease.
    2
  1581.  @andrejkumer  Correct, but there is not enough waste to feed all livestock. And of course there are plenty of other downsides of super high livestock numbers.
    2
  1582. zij
    2
  1583. It doesn’t. Mass has only a small effect, especially when cruising on the highway.
    2
  1584.  @orangepeel1366  In this case speed is everything as we need CO2 emissions to decline fast.
    2
  1585. Inderdaad. De veehouderij heeft niets in de 21e eeuw te zoeken.
    2
  1586. Dude how can you be so uninformed in 2024. All the answers are easy to find.
    2
  1587. No doubt. The Netherlands, Germany, Sweden and Denmark are already very close.
    2
  1588. Haha nee 😂
    2
  1589.  @calumclark1719  Yeah, mainly. Although fuel cells themselves are neither very famous because of there efficiency..
    2
  1590. Yup, already pouring in
    2
  1591. Tegen wie heb je het überhaupt?
    2
  1592. Mostly not.
    2
  1593. You mean in favour of hydrogen fuel.
    2
  1594. Not true. Hydrogen cars have been around for over a decade and it is still shit because of physics and math.
    2
  1595. not POS but yes, expensive.
    2
  1596.  @ronbradshaw7404  I know certain areas are great for hydro. It just won’t be enough for other parts of the world so we need great alternatives like wind and solar.
    2
  1597. Hydrogen combustion engine 🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️
    2
  1598.  @strang1124  Hydrogen doesn't grow on TREES?
    2
  1599.  @strang1124  Not at all. It's just physics. You have some catching up to do.
    2
  1600. dat kun je bij elke snelheid wel zeggen. Overdag 100 is een prima oplossing.
    2
  1601. Incredibly sad indeed
    2
  1602. Haha ja echt he. Het wappiegehalte is idioot hoog. Als iets een beetje te onaangenaam of ingewikkeld voor ze wordt, dan heeft opeens de overheid het allemaal gedaan!1!!!.
    2
  1603.  @outofthebox5441  There is no guarantee that fusion energy, if it ever gets to large scale production, will be cheap. So even with fusion energy it makes perfect sense to use batteries and not hydrogen.
    2
  1604.  @outofthebox5441  Public chargers will be everywhere in the future. Yes, hydrogen makes sense for other applications. Not for passenger cars.
    2
  1605.  @martinerozeboom9636  Vitaminetekorten doen zich voor bij mensen met allerlei verschillende diëten.
    2
  1606. Genoeg occasions hoor.
    2
  1607.  @Dylan-mr5hs  Nergens op gebaseerd
    2
  1608. De enige zinvolle methode is niet slachten.
    2
  1609. Yeah it gets even better than it already is :D
    2
  1610. Yes, they were. But soon not anymore.
    2
  1611. Never heard of the oil industry using loads of cobalt for desulphulrisation of fuel?!
    2
  1612. That doesn't matter. There are A LOT of second hand EVs needed the next few decades. It's great that some people are willing to provide these.
    2
  1613. Hydrogen vehicles require platinum, lithium, cobalt and nickel.
    2
  1614. Mainly industrial applications where hydrogen has been used as a feedstock for decades (i.e. fertilizer production) will need a lot of green hydrogen. Cooking on hydrogen would be pretty wasteful.
    2
  1615. Nothing special. That is literally what all EV manufacturers started with, including Tesla.
    2
  1616.  @PETERJOHN101  I can only guess. The fact that Volvo started producing plug-in hybrid cars over a decade ago and the Geely takeover probably play an important role.
    2
  1617. EV will always win efficiency wise. And no, transmissions losses in the grid are not a lot. Only about 5%.
    2
  1618. That is exactly the point. If this makes people consume less meat it is great.
    2
  1619.  @iceman18211  nice!
    2
  1620. ja, omdat zoiets niet bestaat.
    2
  1621.  @b_n_d_i_e_t_053bosch4  Nee dat is een feit.
    2
  1622. ​ @b_n_d_i_e_t_053bosch4  Als je even de moeite neemt om enige basiskennis natuurkunde tot je te nemen dan besef je dat het complete onzin is.
    2
  1623. Lol so where do you think materials for hydrogen cars come from?!
    2
  1624.  @jonathansmith7306  Not considerably. Thermodynamics is not very forgiving when converting electric energy to liquid fuel.
    2
  1625. De veehouderij opdoeken a.u.b.
    2
  1626. Arthik Alexander For long term energy storage hydrogen will probably play a role. Efficiency is lower than pumped hydro so hydrogen should not be the first choice.
    2
  1627.  @peterdejong5456  CO2 is een mondiaal probleem dat mondiaal moet worden opgelost. Het zou nogal absurt zijn als alleen Nederland vrolijk blijft doorpuffen op benzine en diesel nietwaar? Bovendien, waar ligt de grens qua landgrootte? Daarnaast kleven er talloze andere voordelen aan elektrisch rijden. Het gaat gewoon gebeuren, of je het nou leuk vindt of niet.
    2
  1628. Hydrogen cars are DOA
    2
  1629.  @anotherelvis The idea is that farms that are sold to the government are taken off the market, at least that is the method in The Netherlands.
    2
  1630.  @anotherelvis  Depends on the situation. It could be that the land is repurposed for other types of agriculture or given back to nature indeed. Some land might be repurposed for housing, depending on the location.
    2
  1631.  @wisemanofsorts6068 The problem is not Elon having an opinion, the problem is him being very vocal about it day in day out.
    2
  1632. In many countries gas stations are installing a lot of fast chargers. Shell, BP, Total, just to name a few.
    2
  1633. Wrong. Battery production is already below 100 kg of CO2 per kWh and this will decline even further over the years. Hydrogen will always remain super inefficient and therefore polluting.
    2
  1634. Not a con at all. EVs are simply the best solution to lower transport emissions. The faster they are adopted, the better. And no, the Taycan will not need a new battery in 14 years.
    2
  1635.  @mennomg6911  Vervang al die dingen die je noemt door alles wat je nodig hebt om waterstof te produceren, op te slaan en distribueren en je hebt een minstens zo grote klus en kostenpakket, en uiteindelijk een inferieur systeem op het gebied van efficiëntie (circa een factor 3). Tevens zijn waterstofauto's ook voorzien van behoorlijk grote accu's voor het leveren en opslaan van piekvermogen. Dus uiteindelijk bouw je alsnog een elektrische auto met nodeloos veel extra componenten die uiteindelijk duurder in gebruik is.
    2
  1636.  @peters972  True, but weight does not impact consumption a lot.
    2
  1637. Voor akkerbouwers is respect volledig op zijn plaats inderdaad, maar daar gaat het hier niet om.
    2
  1638. Well explained.
    2
  1639. You would need ridiculous numbers of solar panels and wind turbines at that location. Just make it a nice fast charger location.
    2
  1640. qwerty 4132 BrightTV? ;)
    2
  1641. 1) Volumetric energy density is still very low 2) Doesn't change much regarding efficiency 3) Unproven technology
    2
  1642. Veel te inefficient en complex. Is allang een gepasseerd station.
    2
  1643. Wrong, where does the hydrogen factory get their power? THE GRID.
    2
  1644.  @Dylan-mr5hs  zelfs als dat waar is, is het maar een tijdelijk effect. Uiteindelijk rijdt gewoon iedereen elektrisch.
    2
  1645.  @VeniVidiAjax  Precies. En met de opkomst van elektrische auto's zal het over niet al te lange tijd normaal zijn om alleen nog maar met een automaat te lessen en rijden.
    2
  1646.  @ytjepool  is over een tijdje voorbij
    2
  1647. Nope. Driving on hydrogen is simply too inefficient.
    2
  1648.  @lolololo-cx4dp  I don’t. Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles create a lot of CO2 during production of hydrogen.
    2
  1649. Bitte schauen sie die preisen von Elektroautos mal an…
    2
  1650.  @hell043  Je vergeet compressie en transport. Meer dan 35% wordt het niet. Waterstof is een ontzettend omslachtige oplossing voor gebrek aan netcapaciteit. Accu’s zijn niet zo vervuilend als veel mensen denken en bovendien heb je voor waterstofauto’s ook lithium, kobalt, nikkel en platinum nodig.
    2
  1651.  @ZoomZoomMX3  Nope
    2
  1652.  @insectbite1714  Exactly. Not many people understand this unfortunately.
    2
  1653. Genau 😂
    2
  1654. Exactly sir.
    2
  1655. Nothing is THE solution to the climate crisis. It's a combination of several different things. Electrification of vehicles will play a very important role.
    2
  1656. Boeren moeten zich aanpassen aan deze tijd en stoppen met het houden van dieren. Er moet veel subsidie beschikbaar komen om veetelers te laten stoppen of omvormen naar een akkerbouwbedrijf.
    2
  1657.  @florisr9  Het is niet onrendabel omdat de vraag zo klein is, maar omdat de techniek zo onrendabel is. Voor dezelfde hoeveelheid elektrische energie kun je in een batterij-auto drie keer zo ver rijden. Het zou dus complete verspilling van energie zijn.
    2
  1658. M A Deze auto wekt helemaal niet zijn eigen energie op. 😂
    2
  1659. Of course, at least in Europe.
    2
  1660. Het maakt mij niks uit hoe je het noemt, maar de veehouderij dient zo snel mogelijk opgedoekt te worden.
    2
  1661. Lol I am sure you will love them within a few years.
    2
  1662.  @rockeerockey6941  It’s just physics. EVs are the only sensible future for automobiles.
    2
  1663. Minder stikstof, minder CO2-uitstoot, minder fijnstof, minder ongelukken.
    2
  1664. Tifosi amsterdam XXX Vertel
    2
  1665. Helmich Visscher graag gedaan.
    2
  1666. kursat072 Precies, dat zeg ik toch.
    2
  1667. Oguz Aktas Fijnstof en stikstof is geen mondiaal maar een lokaal probleem. Dat adem jij ook allemaal in en dat komt echt niet uit China aanwaaien.
    2
  1668.  @ComeJesusChrist Overall emissions of any EV are far and far lower.
    2
  1669. Manmanman wat een onzin en dat in 2024. Informeer jezelf. Succes.
    2
  1670. saarb737 Why don’t you go for some steam driven vehicle instead. Then you also have to shovel in some coal every now and then. That’s even better INVOLVEMENT.
    2
  1671. saarb737 Thanks
    2
  1672.  @EarthQuake2099  Helemaal geen vlees natuurlijk.
    2
  1673. Fully electric is far superior and will kill diesel in many applications within the next decade.
    2
  1674. Lab grown meat would fix many more problems. Animal agriculture is devastating and inherently inefficient.
    2
  1675. S D Uiteraard, dat weet toch iedereen? De vraag is, hoe kun je toch met zoveel mensen op deze planeet leven maar wel de uitstoot verlagen?
    2
  1676.  @jec_ecart  It’s kind of pointless to ‘disagree’ about scientific facts.
    2
  1677. Combustion engine cars create far more energy loss during winter, spring, summer and autumn. 😮
    2
  1678. So what do you propose
    2
  1679. Gulden U begrijpt het gelukkig.
    2
  1680. Animal agriculture is about 15% of total. Quite a lot indeed.
    2
  1681. Exactly and range will be terrible (far less than a modern EV).
    2
  1682.  @hollandmeester347  Goed verhaal 😂
    2
  1683.  @wvdvegt  Het zal het milieu wel belasten want het is, zoals gezegd, enorm inefficiënt. Je hebt dus heel veel energie nodig met alle CO2-uitstoot tot gevolg.
    2
  1684.  @wvdvegt  Maar omdat het zo inefficiënt is moet je heel veel windmolens bouwen. Veel meer windmolens dan je ooit nodig zou hebben wanneer iedereen elektrisch zou rijden.
    2
  1685. Wim van der Vegt Veel minder CO2. Daar gaat het immers om. En ja, accu’s zijn vrij schoon. Momenteel circa 100 kg CO2 productieuitstoot per kWh dus dat heb je redelijk snel gecompenseerd. Planet of the Humans is gebaseerd op compleet gedateerde en onjuiste informatie, dat is door experts en wetenschappers meteen na het uitkomen ervan al geconstateerd en als je je zelf een beetje inleest kun je dat ook.
    2
  1686. Plenty of other brands of EVs and charging networks available in Norway.
    2
  1687. “Allang bewezen dat het niet klopt” 😂
    2
  1688. Incorrect. EVs are perfectly fine for individual transport.
    2
  1689. De veehouderij heeft geen bestaansrecht meer.
    2
  1690. Zucht. Waarom wordt er weer geen onderscheid gemaakt tussen veehouders en akkerbouwers? Deze jonge mensen moeten zich gewoon richten op akkerbouw. Veeteelt heeft niets te zoeken in de 21e eeuw.
    2
  1691.  @stonetoolcompany3649  The world already has 10 years of experience with mass produced EVs and in general they are holding up very well - yes even in EV world capital Norway.
    2
  1692.  @satriyapradana8017  Milo is not BMI Russian lol
    2
  1693. In most situations hydrogen is terribly inefficient and therefore batteries are a lot more effective in lowering CO2 emissions. Green hydrogen is required for fertilizer and steel production and possibly for synthetic aviation fuels.
    2
  1694. Too expensive and cumbersome. Lost it to fast charging because it barely makes a difference.
    2
  1695. Jack B Gewoon een dikke kabel naar Europa. Veel efficienter.
    2
  1696.  @aheroyaheroyalproductions7631  Mevrouw Ouwehand is een wijze vrouw. Als we binnenkort de veestapel drastisch gaan verkleinen is dat inderdaad een zeer nuttige besteding van het vrijgekomen land. Het gaat overigens om slechts 10% van de landbouwgrond. De hoofdreden dat de veehouderij enorm moet gaan inkrimpen (en uiteindelijk verdwijnen natuurlijk) is de gigantische milieubelasting en grootschalige schending van dierenrechten.
    2
  1697.  @maxthemagition  Spot on. An average EV EV will consume a little less than 10 kWh per day (50 km).
    2
  1698. Lol. Koop een rol aluminiumfolie zou ik zeggen.
    2
  1699.  @hansvanrijswijk409  Raad eens waar het overgrote merendeel van Flevoland uit bestaat.
    2
  1700.  @hansvanrijswijk409  Blijkbaar weet je het niet.
    2
  1701.  @Klont123  Afval is wat anders dan uitstoot. En windmolens gaan vrij lang mee hoor. Het recyclen van composietmateriaal, waar de wieken van gemaakt zijn, is nog niet zo makkelijk inderdaad. Daar is nog werk aan de winkel. De wieken gaan echter gerust 20 jaar mee. Een windmolen heeft binnen een half jaar draaien z'n productieuitstoot gecompenseerd.
    2
  1702.  @TBFSJjunior  You are correct.
    2
  1703. But super inefficient.
    2
  1704.  @gouthamkatta  Correct, but it only is a temporary problem ;)
    2
  1705.  @ankur313  Lithium is not running out at all and never will. Hydrogen production is inefficient and can only marginally be improved.
    2
  1706.  @ankur313  That is the case with you, not with me. Again: inform yourself.
    2
  1707. Radio active 😂
    2
  1708. Manuel Müller exactly
    2
  1709. 😅
    2
  1710. Not at all. What do you think is wrong with lithium?
    2
  1711. Reuse and recycle
    2
  1712. 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
  1713. 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
  1714. You have no clue. Big oil loves hydrogen and is actively lobbying to promote it.
    2
  1715. Emissions are still lower
    2
  1716.  @notagain1952 😂
    2
  1717. Of course you can split water on board a vehicle, but you need to have an energy source to keep doing that. So guess what, you still need to charge a big battery.
    2
  1718.  @SeanWork  H2 in domestic gas lines will never be a thing. Burning H2 at home for cooking and heat would be the most inefficient way to use renewable energy ever.
    2
  1719.  @dehypnotizerz  Incorrect. As we all know, lifecycle emissions of an EV are far lower than any diesel is ever capable of.
    2
  1720.  @JoeBManco  wrong
    2
  1721.  @JoeBManco  I say 'wrong' because it is 2024. Everyone knows EVs are the future and that they are great, except for people who just don't want to inform themselves - let alone try one.
    2
  1722.  @JoeBManco  If you had informed yourself you would have known that proper EVs cost less than that and you can even buy great used ones for 15 to 20K.
    2
  1723. Wrong. Electric cars are cleaner despite the fact that battery production causes emissions.
    2
  1724.  @untoastedbread0  Again, electric cars are cleaner. I didn't say they produce zero emissions.
    2
  1725. Veehouders bedoel je.
    2
  1726.  @David-135  Sure there are some differences around the world emission wise. But in the big picture it doesn't really matter.
    2
  1727.  @lucrolland7489  Like Joe said, it just comes down to basic physics. This won't change in the future.
    2
  1728.  @pvdneste  haha xD
    2
  1729. Requiring A LOT more solar energy than EVs.
    2
  1730. Uiteindelijk heeft het op de economie ook een positief effect. De economische gevolgen van klimaatverandering zullen immers niet te bevatten groot zijn.
    2
  1731. Exactly
    2
  1732. We are pretty much at price parity already…
    2
  1733.  @Rustigan  Nee, veel minder zoals we allemaal weten.
    1
  1734.  @vangrun579  Als er iemand zich duidelijk niet in de materie heeft verdiept ben jij het wel.
    1
  1735.  @hydeparkist  Mest is geen reden om de huidige situatie in stand te houden. Ja, we gebruiken mest voor akkerbouw. Maar akkerbouw zonder dierlijke mest en kunstmest is ook mogelijk. Dit gebeurt inderdaad nog heel weinig, maar dat betekent niet dat we moeten gaan wachten met het drastisch verkleinen van de veestapel. Stikstof is slechts een van de vele nadelen van de veehouderij.
    1
  1736.  @hydeparkist  Allemaal aannames en lege woorden. In mijn ogen gaat het uitstekend. We weten allemaal dat dierlijke producten enorm inefficient en vervuilend zijn. Dus het verkleinen van de veestapel is een uitstekend begin. 40% van alle akkerbouw bestaat om de veehouderij van veevoer te voorzien. Wanneer de veehouderij dus krimpt neemt ook de monocultuur af en ook de afhankelijkheid van soja uit regenwouden om slechts twee voordelen te noemen.
    1
  1737.  @hydeparkist  Ik zie het verkleinen van de veestapel inderdaad als effectieve maatregel om de stikstofuitstoot drastisch te verlagen als dat is wat je bedoelt.
    1
  1738. Wronggggg
    1
  1739. 😂
    1
  1740. Yes it’s all a conspiracy 🙀🙀🙀
    1
  1741. Nope. They both start with electricity.
    1
  1742. Exactly
    1
  1743. Very well explained.
    1
  1744. A. Most EVs are charged at home or at a public charger in the street. That is just a fact. B. The battery does not need replacement.
    1
  1745. Except that the Model 3 is barely more expensive than the average car.
    1
  1746.  @mkyhou1160  You misread the article. The exact reason for Hertz holding back on purchasing more Model 3 vehicles is because of their recent price drops, meaning they lost resale value for Hertz. Hertz is still committed to purchasing a lot more Teslas in the future. And yes, parts and repair prices are another reason. Bottom line is an M3 is still a very affordable option for the average new car buyer.
    1
  1747. Lol, watetstof is kansloos. Super inefficient en er is 0 infrastructuur. Maar waarom zou de overheid er niks aan kunnen verdienen?
    1
  1748. Not really. Natural gas produces almost just as much CO2 as gasoline.
    1
  1749. Er zijn zat Tesla Superchargers in Nederland, Frankrijk, Duitsland, Spanje, Italie, Duitsland en Engeland. Daarnaast zijn er ook al heel veel niet-Tesla laders langs te snelwegen. Bergopwaards gebruik je veel energie (net als een auto met verbrandingsmotor), bergafwaards win je weer energie terug.
    1
  1750. source: trust me bro
    1
  1751.  @Sbinott0  That’s probably the showroom model. I see them on the road regularly and in 2023 alone VW sold more than 35k units.
    1
  1752. Nope we do not. Too inefficient.
    1
  1753. In 2005 blijven hangen?
    1
  1754.  @Sierra-Whisky  Dat is dus niet het geval
    1
  1755.  @benjaminnead8557  Yes, those are for the lower range vehicles.
    1
  1756.  @jaysmith179  Not really and still far better than burning gasoline or diesel.
    1
  1757.  @engineeredtruths8935  Koolstof is echter niet het zelfde als stikstof.
    1
  1758. In Duitsland is er net zo goed op veel plekken sprake van stikstofproblematiek. Alleen is de veehouderij in Nederland veel geconcentreerder.
    1
  1759.  @bretert  Onder andere het Ruhrgebied en Nedersaksen. In Nederland is het probleem echter veel groter omdat wij veel meer veeteelt hebben. En als je denkt dat immigratie iets met het stikstofprobleem te maken heeft dan weet je totaal niet waar je over spreekt.
    1
  1760. Lol until you realise that hydrogen cars require three to four times as much electric energy.
    1
  1761. Wat stel jij voor?
    1
  1762.  @mrgurulittle7000  Not relevant as 95% of all charging is slow / overnight charging. Fast charging is only required for long trips.
    1
  1763.  @mrgurulittle7000  Depends on where you live. If you don’t see them it will simply be a matter of time. In my country there are over 3300 fast charging locations and 8 hydrogen stations.
    1
  1764.  @mrgurulittle7000  The Netherlands
    1
  1765.  @mrgurulittle7000  yes, but not hydrogen
    1
  1766.  @mrgurulittle7000  Sheess I already explained to you why hydrogen is far worse than BEV and will always remain so. It is terrible ESPECIALLY in combustion engines.
    1
  1767. Most vegans are very proud of this.
    1
  1768. Boeit niet. Alsnog vele en vele malen beter dan fossiele brandstoffen gebruiken.
    1
  1769. "Air and gravity" please elaborate.
    1
  1770. And eventually these countries will also limit the amount livestock and there we are.
    1
  1771. It is.
    1
  1772.  @einfachgenial cool!
    1
  1773. What kind of mileage do you think you need?
    1
  1774.  @rattanack1413  I see. But you have to take a break anyway after 200 to 300 miles right? Fast charging often does not take more than half an hour. And Toyota has been promising that for quite a while. But yes, who knows.
    1
  1775. De dieren zullen dankbaar zijn.
    1
  1776. What are you talking about. Many farmers protesting ARE factory farmers.
    1
  1777. But then the comparison would be invalid.
    1
  1778. Lol
    1
  1779. It’s not low
    1
  1780.  @thomascube1986  I drive on the Autobahn regularly. Anything with Vmax > 120 kmh is fine and definitely not dangerous.
    1
  1781. You have no clue.
    1
  1782. Because electric motors are FAR more efficient.
    1
  1783. Hydrogen is too inefficient.
    1
  1784. Well that’s because combustion engines will simply not play a considerable role in the future.
    1
  1785.  @johnwenzel2003  The technology exists, it is just a matter of time for large scale implementation.
    1
  1786. komt vanzelf
    1
  1787. Veehouders hoeven niet met rust gelaten te worden.
    1
  1788. 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
  1789. 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
  1790. Obviously this should go hand in hand with decreasing meat and dairy consumption.
    1
  1791. Lol not at all.
    1
  1792. Battery electric is the only solution.
    1
  1793. Yes, back in the day. Today many other countries can easily afford this and they are doing so.
    1
  1794.  @raitisberkmanis4028  Yes, for example. And I quote: "In 2023 the average emissions of Germany were 354 g CO2eq/kWh. 59% of energy was produced from renewable sources, with the main source for energy being Wind (30.8%). Coal usage was 26.0%. Germany is one of the top countries in renewable energy production."
    1
  1795. Europe decided to stop buying Russian gas.
    1
  1796. We weten inmiddels al lang en breed dat ‘innovatie’ nauwelijks effect heeft. De veehouderij drastisch verkleinen is de enige oplossing.
    1
  1797. Hybrids can be an okay solution for the time being, but nothing more than that.
    1
  1798. Thanks.
    1
  1799. Lol where dit you get that BS. CNG causes just as much CO2 emissions as gasoline.
    1
  1800. Vlees en zuivel hebben we niet nodig.
    1
  1801. Incorrect. ICE fuel emissions are so bad that it is better to produce a brand new EV and use it.
    1
  1802. Wrong. About 20% of CO2 emissions come from road transportation. Construction industry is another major contributor, but not the biggest problem.
    1
  1803.  @clxma  Literally all google results point towards ~20%
    1
  1804.  @clxma  If Greenpeace refers to passenger cars that may be correct.
    1
  1805. "En dat terwijl moderne dieselbussen minder co2 uitstoten dan dat ze binnen krijgen" Waar de fuck heb jij het over? "De techniek van tegenwoordig is er echt wel om zuinig te kunnen zijn met fossiele brandstoffen, zuiniger dan er werven van batterij grondstoffen" Ook fout. En verder, verbrandingsmotoren op waterstof zijn ongelofelijk inefficient en verbruiken dus gigantisch veel meer elektriciteit dan een elektrische auto met alle CO2-emissies van dien.
    1
  1806. Lol yeah let's not believe or care about physics XD
    1
  1807. Dat is juist niet zo. Een elektrische auto zorgt, ondanks productie-uitstoot van de accu's, alsnog voor een lagere CO2-uitstoot.
    1
  1808. Lol
    1
  1809.  @shakeandbake9562  Yeah, CCS is pretty much over in Europe.
    1
  1810. I advise you to read a little bit about basic laws of physics. Thermodynamics specifically.
    1
  1811. Of course not. The idea was to make it fully electric from the beginning. That is what makes it so special.
    1
  1812. Meat and dairy production is never efficient.
    1
  1813. Ehm no.
    1
  1814. Because AC motors are much more efficient.
    1
  1815. @Milan Swoboda I see, thanks. Very interesting subject.
    1
  1816. Exactly sir.
    1
  1817. Battery
    1
  1818. Not relevant at all. It's literally NOTHING compared to the amount of oil required for fuel production.
    1
  1819. bedoening
    1
  1820.  @alexandrufilipescu1301  In my country too. What is your point?
    1
  1821. Alexandru Filipescu The fact that it is cheap doesn’t mean it is a solution for the future. It still emits CO2 and other shit.
    1
  1822. Exactly.
    1
  1823. hoe kom je daar bij?
    1
  1824.  @rybik7267  Je hebt duidelijk geen idee waar je het over hebt.
    1
  1825. Feeding hydrogen into an internal combustion engine is even less efficient than converting it back to electricity and powering an electric motor.
    1
  1826.  @bartluttels6948  Hydrogen is stupid.
    1
  1827.  @bartluttels6948  Too damn inefficient.
    1
  1828.  @bartluttels6948  Wrong. Fuel cells and other components also require mining and cause emissions during production. You will need three times the amount of nuclear power stations to produce enough hydrogen compared to battery electric vehicles.
    1
  1829. You are worried about a gallon or two of gas that was left in the vehicle? All used fluids of cars are always properly disposed of in workshops.
    1
  1830. It's pretty bad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3IPR50-soNA&t=21s
    1
  1831. Not at all. Hydrogen is a dumb solution.
    1
  1832. Klimaat en milieu zijn uitstekende redenen om te stoppen met veeteelt.
    1
  1833.  @doomie21  Het land wordt ook niet volgegooid met woningen.
    1
  1834.  @doomie21  "Het hoofddoel voor wat betreft de natuur- en stikstofaanpak is een gunstige staat van instandhouding op landelijk niveau en het bereiken van de instandhoudingsdoelstellingen van de Natura 2000-gebieden in het bijzonder." Bron: Startnotitie Nationaal Programma Landelijk Gebied, 10-06-2022
    1
  1835.  @doomie21  Natuurlijk. Gewoon het gevolg van wetenschappelijk onderzoek.
    1
  1836.  @doomie21  Het is gewoon logisch. We zouden maar een fractie van het landoppervlakte nodig hebben om de wooncrisis op te lossen.
    1
  1837. Wrong. Even without storage they are great.
    1
  1838. LPG is niet schoon en al helemaal geen oplossing voor de toekomst. Het is ook niet zuinig trouwens. Een auto op LPG verbruikt meer dan een op benzine.
    1
  1839.  @dorus559  Voor de gek gehouden? Dit is gewoon algemeen bekend. Elektrisch is de toekomst.
    1
  1840.  @marielou1982 nabije toekomst *
    1
  1841.  @Habs1967  waar haal je die onzin vandaan?
    1
  1842. Technically Difficulties And that current comes from...
    1
  1843.  @technicallydifficulties7094  I don't see any advantage. The problem is compression. Lot's of compression. 500 - 700 Bar. Which has to happen in the car as well.
    1
  1844.  @technicallydifficulties7094  Mehh. Sorry man, just put a nice battery in that same car and it will be much more efficient and simpel.
    1
  1845. Yea fuel cells come falling from the sky..
    1
  1846. How on earth could expect such a range?!
    1
  1847. What counts is lifecycle emissions of the EV.
    1
  1848.  @christerry1773  True, but at the same time people tend to become extremely distracted by these facts and then all of a sudden start assuming that electric vehicles are worse than gasoline equivalents.
    1
  1849. Wind and solar ARE firm sources of clean energy.
    1
  1850. Nee, omdat waterstof gewoon bedroevend inefficient is en een verspilling van energie.
    1
  1851. Meh, in the meantime electric trucks are being mass produced and used on long distances.
    1
  1852. Ever heard of public chargers along the street?
    1
  1853. Gijs Haarman Accus maken is niet zo slecht. En accus worden niet vernietigd. Doorrijden op diesel en benzine is vele malen schadelijker.
    1
  1854. Gijs Haarman Het is duidelijk dat je zelf nooit verder dan een artikeltje in de Telegraaf bent gekomen.
    1
  1855.  @gijshaarman1667  Nu al het geniaalste argument van het jaar 👍🏻 Lekker schreeuwen als het te ingewikkeld wordt of de waarheid je niet bevalt.
    1
  1856. Als de eieren in een vroeg stadium worden vernietigd zal er geen sprake zijn van bewustzijn.
    1
  1857. Lol just because you once saw a picture on the internet of a super charger powered by a generator does not mean this is standard practice.
    1
  1858. Inefficient
    1
  1859. Take a look at Arrival
    1
  1860. It is not acceptable when you realize that three times the amount of battery electric cars can be charged with the same amount of energy. Renewables are not free.
    1
  1861. sterk punt man
    1
  1862.  @kimberleypex  fabrieken zoals?
    1
  1863. Very inefficient.
    1
  1864.  @muckman5509  We would only need a fraction of nuclear energy to power battery electric vehicles.
    1
  1865.  @muckman5509  Nobody forgets about that. Battery electric is still far more efficient, despite the losses in electricity generation.
    1
  1866.  @muckman5509  It is that simple. It has been calculated over and over. Battery electric always wins when it comes to energy efficiency.
    1
  1867.  @muckman5509  Energy = energy. Battery electric is about 4 times more efficient than eFuels.
    1
  1868. therembek They will die anyway. Vehicles that produce smoke just don’t belong in the 21st century, let alone in the 22nd.
    1
  1869. Inefficient and causes food vs. fuel conflicts.
    1
  1870. There is loads of cheap used EVs on the market.
    1
  1871.  @myrons_onesixthcollection  In real life it barely makes a difference. Proper EVs do 1000 km in less than 10 hours. And obviously sales numbers are not relevant.
    1
  1872.  @beehappy7797 ?
    1
  1873. You are wrong
    1
  1874. Biologisch vlees en zuivel is net zo goed slecht voor het milieu, het klimaat en dierenwelzijn.
    1
  1875.  @rajarsi6438  Melk veroorzaakt minstens zo veel dierenleed als vlees.
    1
  1876.  @rajarsi6438  Fout. Melk is voor babykoeien en voor niemand anders.
    1
  1877.  @after_midnight9592  nope
    1
  1878. it's lifecycle emissions that count.
    1
  1879. Super inefficient
    1
  1880. Genuine Gameplays How would you produce HHO?
    1
  1881. 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
  1882. Haha so you don't recognise laws of physics either?
    1
  1883. Nobody claims that.
    1
  1884. Erm nope
    1
  1885.  @mkviis  Elon is laughing his ass off about hydrogen vehicles.
    1
  1886. It is more sustainable than driving an ICE car in this class.
    1
  1887. 'vrije energie' ja, had je nu maar opgelet bij natuurkunde he.
    1
  1888. Wat dacht je van gewoon planten?
    1
  1889. Meat and dairy are pretty useless types of food and reducing these is therefore a very effective solution for this problem.
    1
  1890. Any mass produced product is bad for the environment. But it is all relative. Electric cars are much better than oil burning vehicles.
    1
  1891. Wrong
    1
  1892. Hydrogen is not cheaper than gasoline. Current fast charging is not considerably slower than filling a hydrogen tank.
    1
  1893. You are so clueless
    1
  1894. The point is EVs pollute far less. That is why fast implementation is so important.
    1
  1895.  @blademan4043  Yes, less. And no, it does not depend. We simply know after years of research.
    1
  1896. Iets met een klok en een klepel
    1
  1897. Africa will switch to cheap electric cars from China. This is already happening.
    1
  1898. Electricity production being largely fossil fueled is not relevant as EVs are even in worst case scenarios cleaner. Also: total life cycle emissions of an EV are always lower.
    1
  1899.  @knav5216  That doesn't change anything.
    1
  1900.  @knav5216  I don’t know what that is as it sounds like a USA type of thing. On topic: life cycle emissions of all sorts of vehicles have been extensively researched over the years and you can find countless peer reviewed reports about them. Good luck reading.
    1
  1901.  @twuandixon8675  Again, data proves otherwise. Inform yourself.
    1
  1902. Exactly. So many people tend to forget this.
    1
  1903. Nope. Starting too late developing electric cars. That is the issue.
    1
  1904. There is plenty of battery powered heavy duty machinery already. Batteries are the way to go in the vast majority of applications.
    1
  1905.  @MegaGouch  Yes there are, look it up. JCB's solution does not have much to do with reality. Combustion is an insanely inefficient way of converting energy. If they really believed in hydrogen they would be working with fuel cells.
    1
  1906.  @MegaGouch  The Model Y was world's best selling car in Q1 this year... JCB and Toyota just want to postpone the end of the combustion engine. That's all they are looking for.
    1
  1907.  @MegaGouch  EV sales are growing rapidly. There is no way back. Retrofitting vehicles in not realistic at all and hydrogen combustion is so incredibly inefficient that we would need 5 times as much electrical energy compared to EVs. Obviously aircraft is a case in which hydrogen combustion probably makes sense. Road vehicles: not at all.
    1
  1908.  @MegaGouch  I know it is possible, but it is simply incredibly inefficient. And these inefficiencies are the result of laws of physics. There is no way to eliminate that. Sure, there might be some niche applications, but if hydrogen is going to be used, it should be in fuel cells. Not in combustion engines. And for passenger cars it is completely out of the question because of the cost per mile and the difficulties of handling and storing hydrogen. You should also realize a vehicle with hydrogen combustion engine will have a very low range because hydrogen takes a lot of space to store, and again, the engine needs a lot of it.
    1
  1909. 😂
    1
  1910.  @overland_adventure_nz  Tell me, what electric vehicle did you own and work on?
    1
  1911. Not at all. Hydrogen is stupid.
    1
  1912. Source?
    1
  1913.  @Technics-zq4hf  ?
    1
  1914. Exactly. VW was too slow adapting.
    1
  1915.  @Jerry.V  Klopt, een lagere snelheid is altijd beter. 30 op de snelweg is natuurlijk belachelijk, maar 100 is al een grote verbetering geweest een paar jaar geleden.
    1
  1916.    lol dat weet toch iedereen. Het gaat om de praktijk.
    1
  1917. That is exactly what the video says. It just takes time.
    1
  1918. BATTERY REPLACEMENT IS VERY RARE.
    1
  1919. Battery busses and trucks are already there.
    1
  1920. Why would wind turbines be a scam when under water turbines are a great idea?
    1
  1921. So you are proposing everything to be low voltage?
    1
  1922. Nog minder efficient dan een waterstofauto.
    1
  1923. Dumb comment 👎🏻👎🏻
    1
  1924.  @10secondsrule  Pretty weak argument for preventing technological advancements.
    1
  1925. Elektrische voertuigen zijn vele malen beter. En ja, accu’s worden gerecycled.
    1
  1926.  @romkehoekstra9913  Je leeft in het verleden. Lithium-ion recycling wordt al jaren gedaan.
    1
  1927. @crzyfetch Op praktisch alle vlakken zijn ze beter: veel efficienter, veel lagere CO2-uitstoot, veel minder onderhoud en veel minder onderdelen in het algemeen. Diesel en benzine dragen totaal niks bij aan een betere wereld. Hoe sneller we overstappen op elektrisch, hoe beter.
    1
  1928. Echt he.
    1
  1929. Nope. Hydrogen is mindbogglingly inefficient and also requires mining for: platinum, nickle, lithium and cobalt.
    1
  1930. You cannot compare emissions or energy consumption to waste disposal.
    1
  1931. Well said. Ze Germans love this narrative.
    1
  1932. Motor, not engine.
    1
  1933. So you think Hydrogen cars are more fun to drive than an EV? 😂 And no, EVs are not worse than ICE or hydrogen cars. They produce the lowest CO2 emissions of them all.
    1
  1934. Lol
    1
  1935. lol so what do you propose
    1
  1936.  @Verdiz700 hé een wappie
    1
  1937.  @damian246  Een fatsoenlijke EV doet dat vele malen sneller en zul je zien dat er in praktijk nauwelijks verschil is in totale reistijd.
    1
  1938. Hydrogen cars are not greener. Battery production is currently at about 100 kg of CO2 per kWh. Pretty good and this is decreased every year.
    1
  1939.  @whatahack  Many companies are currently preparing for mass EV battery recycling. Look up Redwood Materials and American Manganese.
    1
  1940.  @whatahack  Yeah probably it is. But everything is relative of course. It is the best option we have. But of course, buying a bicycle is better than an electric car.
    1
  1941. It's a myth.
    1
  1942. Hydrogen fuel cells are waaaay too inefficient.
    1
  1943. Lol so you thought that electrolysers, fuel cells and batteries for hydrogen cars do not require mining?
    1
  1944.  @michaelzhuhovitsky3889  well taxes makes sense right.
    1
  1945. Not really
    1
  1946. Yep 😀
    1
  1947.  @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
  1948. Also you will be driving an EV.
    1
  1949. Not at all. The restriction is physics. Hydrogen cars can never become significantly more efficient.
    1
  1950. Stikstof is ook een lokaal probleem.
    1
  1951. Livestock farming cannot continue the way it is.
    1
  1952.  @xhonkeri4066  Electric cars were efficient from day one.
    1
  1953.  @trungson6604  Laws of physics don’t change. Hydrogen will always remain inefficient.
    1
  1954. Not even close to the effects of petroleum production and combustion.
    1
  1955.  @ThePilotGear exactly
    1
  1956.  @aldoleyvam  Doesn’t mean cars should keep driving on diesel too. Also: electric cars often have far more torque than a diesel.
    1
  1957. Want?
    1
  1958. Erg mooie cijfers
    1
  1959. Battery electric cars are far superior. Fortunately governments have also realised this.
    1
  1960. SarDeantje Juist niet vrijblijvend.
    1
  1961. SarDeantje Tja, het was pas echt vrijblijvend als er helemaal geen verduurzamingseisen waren gesteld. Maar inderdaad, je hebt grotendeels gelijk.
    1
  1962. Hydrogen is terribly inefficient.
    1
  1963. Yes, but prices are dropping fast. In some states a Tesla Model 3 costs around 30k.
    1
  1964. Lol people still believe in this myth?!
    1
  1965. Surplus renewable energy will be less of a problem when more EVs enter the road.
    1
  1966. The world doesn’t need meat and dairy.
    1
  1967. Yes, I am sure China could supply
    1
  1968.  @1gizmospot kW
    1
  1969. Because you cannot have both in a average size car. Hydrogen tanks take up a lot of space and so do batteries.
    1
  1970. EV is the only option
    1
  1971.  @will7its  ?
    1
  1972. The oil companies would love this to happen so they can sell hydrogen. Fortunately battery electric vehicles are far superior.
    1
  1973. Haha yes
    1
  1974. Yeah sure, GM going for some scam technology from the 90's.
    1
  1975. ‘Portable hydrogen refuel system’ elaborate please
    1
  1976.  @nikhiljain9131  Doesn't make any sense. Far more complicated and less efficient. You would need three times the amount of solar panels on your roof to drive a similar distance as an EV.
    1
  1977.  @nikhiljain9131  You are completely misinformed. The world is not moving towards hydrogen, especially not Germany. Volkswagen for example has recently said they quit developing any fuel cell models and so do many other car manufacturers. Driving on hydrogen was a short experiment. Hydrogen production, storage and usage will never become considerably more efficient due to simple laws of physics.
    1
  1978. You drive 1000 miles without a break?
    1
  1979. Those are some common misconceptions. 1. You can easily store energy in stationary batteries at chargers. These kind of fast chargers do already exist and are being used in Europe. The losses that occur in this extra charging / discharging step are far lower than with the hydrogen solution you described. 2. Cars won’t be charging every day at the same moment and at the same power. We are not all lining up at the gas station on a daily basis either, right? 3. Electric cars and smart chargers allow for peak shaving because they are able to supply variable charging speeds during the day according to the grid load. This already exists as well.
    1
  1980. Closing the nuclear plants did not increase electricity prices. Not coming with sanctions against Russia was obviously not an option.
    1
  1981. Public charger.
    1
  1982.  @engineeringtheweirdguy2103  Well said.
    1
  1983. Wrong
    1
  1984. grapjas
    1
  1985. You forgot about emissions. Low efficiency = high CO2 emissions per mile.
    1
  1986. Batteries do not die… infrastructure is fine and gets better every year.
    1
  1987.  @ericeandco  Where have you been?
    1
  1988.  @drunkenhobo8020  Very likely 😬
    1
  1989.  @jammiedodger7040  Of course, but your number is far too high. It is more around 30,000 miles. Hydrogen combustion engine cars are simply too inefficient to make a notable dent in emissions as they consume five times as much electricity per mile. And no, there is no ‘extremely efficient’ engine in the making. Biofuels would be impossible as this would require far too much land.
    1
  1990. Not at all. Hydrogen requires three times as much electricity. High end EVs already offer the same driving range as a hydrogen vehicle.
    1
  1991. Yeah and fuel cells grow on trees 😂
    1
  1992. Redbad van Rijn Zelfs als hij na 8 jaar total loss zou gaan is het mileuvoordeel groot.
    1
  1993.  @Dr.AnonymousPro  Mijn punt was dat het milieuvoordeel vele malen eerder al wordt bereikt. Niet bij niet bij 8 jaar, maar reeds bij een jaar of 3 a 4.
    1
  1994. Hoogste tijd om de veeteelt op te doeken.
    1
  1995. Elektrische voertuigen spelen een essentiële rol in de energietransitie.
    1
  1996.  @GENleecossie  Nergens op gebaseerd. Elektrisch rijden is de enige optie om de CO2-uitstoot van wegverkeer drastisch te verlagen.
    1
  1997. ⁠​⁠ @GENleecossie  Het spijt me, maar dit is wederom nergens over gebaseerd. Zoals al jarenlang in talloze wetenschappelijke artikelen is te lezen, is de uitstoot gedurende de volledige levenscyclus van een elektrische auto vele malen lager dan die van een vergelijkbaar model op benzine of diesel. Een accu vervangen is zeer zeldzaam, maar zelfs als dat wel nodig is, is de totale CO-uitstoot veel lager. Het hele verhaal over derdewereldlandenverhaal raakt al helemaal kant noch wal.
    1
  1998.  @GENleecossie Het enige dat telt is de volledige levenscyclus. Het vervangen van een accu gebeurt zelden, simpelweg omdat het niet nodig is.
    1
  1999. Why is the first car that gives you a ride right hand drive?
    1
  2000. Well said!
    1
  2001.  @Mcorpmike  Je roept maar wat. ‘ze verdienen er goud geld aan’ wie zijn ze? Aan zonnepanelen verdient alleen de installateur en de eigenaar iets. En nee, de overheid is niet gebaad bij hogere energietarieven, de energiebelasting is immers geen percentage.
    1
  2002.  @waterheaterservices  That’s not a semi truck. It’s more of a consumer product.
    1
  2003.  @apacheknows626 Plenty of life cycle analysis reports have proven that you are simply wrong. Inform yourself.
    1
  2004.  @apacheknows626  Youtube doesn’t allow links. Google ‘EV life cycle emissions’ and you will find some reports to read.
    1
  2005.  @nickk.9914  Dan nog is dat aangenamer en efficienter dan dat iedereen met z'n eigen plofmotortje rondpuft. Accu's kunnen volledig gerecycled worden in tegenstelling tot fossiele brandstoffen die je in de fik steekt en vervolgens gewoon kwijt bent. Het winnen van lithium is helemaal geen probleem. Het wordt gehaald uit zoutvlaktes. Ten opzichte van het winnen en raffineren van fossiele brandstoffen is het verkrijgen van lithium echt een peulenschil op het gebied van 'schade aan de planeet'.
    1
  2006. Lol fast charging does not take an hour. Hydrogen is dumb.
    1
  2007. Except that the diesel vehicle produced many times more CO2 during its life than the EV.
    1
  2008. Niks mis mee hoor. Opdoeken die handel.
    1
  2009. Iedereen die een beetje heeft opgelet bij natuurkunde weet dat het simpelweg niet kan. Punt.
    1
  2010. Get over it. Electric is the future.
    1
  2011. The EV of course. Drives much better and cheaper. Battery replacement is very rare.
    1
  2012.  @deanporter9936  You have clearly no clue.
    1
  2013. Veel schoner dan benzine of diesel.
    1
  2014. Akkerbouwers ja. Veeteelt moet zo snel mogelijk weg.
    1
  2015.  @jeffreyhowes9986  Und verursacht trotzdem viel mehr CO2!
    1
  2016. Omdat jij iets niet leuk vindt betekent het niet dat het onzin is.
    1
  2017. Precies. Dit is de allerbeste oplossing.
    1
  2018.  @nightchicken283  Veel minder dan veehouderij.
    1
  2019. Tja jammer dan. De veehouderij hoort gewoon niet in de 21e eeuw thuis.
    1
  2020.  @Dude-zz9om  Nee, ik eet geen dierlijke producten.
    1
  2021. Emissions...
    1
  2022. Of course not. Hydrogen fuel cell cars are highly complex which makes them expensive to build and requires much more maintenance than an EV. Apart from that they are much more expensive to run than an EV. Does not sound like something that fits in developing countries at all.
    1
  2023. It is very inefficient.
    1
  2024. 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
  2025. 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
  2026. 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
  2027. RadicalErin xD
    1
  2028. That is such a famous misconception. Driving an EV is always the least polluting option. Even if you mainly use coal heavy electricity.
    1
  2029. Lol not at all. Most people prefer a sustainable planet.
    1
  2030. It will be a combination of many solutions. Renewable energy, electric vehicles, the end of animal agriculture, recycling, bio-based materials, decline of population, etc.
    1
  2031. You forgot about the insane lack of efficiency of hydrogen cars.
    1
  2032.  @JerryRigEverything  kWh
    1
  2033. Yes. 95
    1
  2034. Hehe 😎
    1
  2035.  @windsolarupnorth7084  There will always be an average number of EVs charging at any given time of the day, perfect for storing heaps of renewable energy. Hydrogen is a massive waste.
    1
  2036. Jawel
    1
  2037.  @Joe.8671  We were talking cars, not airplanes. Efficiency is the most important thing because that lowers CO2 emissions. Hydrogen for passenger cars makes no sense at all. Big trucks on hydrogen would be acceptable to a certain degree but should be battery powered as much as possible.
    1
  2038. Oil companies have been making hydrogen for quite a while..
    1
  2039. He explains in the video that his house will use a ground source heat pump.
    1
  2040. Met boeren in het algemeen is uiteraard niets mis. Iedereen begrijpt dat akkerbouw nodig is om de wereld van voedsel te voorzien. De veeteelt daarentegen dient echter zo snel mogelijk te verdwijnen.
    1
  2041. Disappointment Gelukkig wel ja.
    1
  2042. TobiasBPS gatverdamme man
    1
  2043.  @kipkip4844  Onzin. Je hebt geen dierlijke mest nodig voor een voedzame bodem.
    1
  2044.  @kipkip4844  Precies. Komt allemaal goed.
    1
  2045.  @kipkip4844  Het gebruiken van dieren voor voedselproductie hoort niet in de 21e eeuw thuis. Zuivel en eieren ook niet. In brood zit doorgaans geen zuivel of ei. De veeteelt moet zo snel mogelijk beëindigd worden omdat moeder natuur juist heel erg wordt verkloot door het feit dat veeteelt bestaat.
    1
  2046. ​ @kipkip4844  Dat is echt onzin. Ik koop en bak al jaren broden zonder melk en ei. In het recept van een normaal brood zit geen melk of ei. En alle voedingsstoffen die in vlees, zuivel en eieren zitten komen oorspronkelijk allemaal uit planten die de dieren eten. Je krijgt die voedingsstoffen dus gewoon binnen als je alleen planten eet.
    1
  2047.  @kipkip4844  Natuurlijk bestaan die producten, maar er bestaan tegenwoordig gelukkig steeds meer producten waar die ingrediënten niet in zitten. Ik koop al vijf jaar geen enkel product waar dierlijke producten in zitten. Ja, ook frietsaus. Dat veel mensen nog wel vlees, zuivel en kaas consumeren betekent niet dat het een goed idee is om er mee door te gaan. Steeds meer mensen beseffen gelukkig dat het beter is om dit te laten staan. Ook de overheid snapt tegenwoordig steeds beter wat de negatieve gevolgen van veeteelt zijn. Hopelijk wordt het spoedig voor iedereen (veehouders en consumenten) minder aantrekkelijk om dierlijke producten te produceren en consumeren.
    1
  2048.  @kipkip4844  Intensieve veehouderij heeft niets met natuur te maken. De Intensieve veehouderij bestaat nog geen 100 jaar en is zeer schadelijk voor mens en milieu.
    1
  2049.  @kipkip4844  Ik zei nog geen 100 jaar. Intensieve veehouderij is immers een ruim begrip.
    1
  2050. ​ @kipkip4844  Intensieve veehouderij is inherent verbonden aan milieuvervuiling - en vernietiging in de vorm van grote hoeveelheden mest, fijnstof, stikstof, watervervuiling, ontbossing en overbevissing. Deze manier van voedselproductie is totaal ongeschikt om de wereld van eten te voorzien - en al helemaal in de toekomst. Het produceren van vlees en zuivel is enorm inefficiënt waardoor er veel te veel energie en land voor nodig is, om nog maar te zwijgen over het gigantische dierenleed.
    1
  2051.  @kipkip4844  Ik stel voor om de documentaire Cowspiracy te kijken. Een uitstekende inleiding over alle negatieve gevolgen van veeteelt. Dan zal je ook begrijpen wat overbevissing met veehouderij te maken heeft. Als iedereen vleesvervangers van soja zou eten zou er helemaal geen ontbossing plaatsvinden omdat je dan veel minder soja in het algemeen nodig hebt want planten direct eten is vele malen efficiënter. Dat plantaardige diëten bijdragen aan ontbossing is letterlijk de bekendste en hardnekkigste misvatting over veganisme. En verder: diervriendelijk vlees en zuivel bestaat per definitie niet. Niet in Oekraïne, niet in Amerika, niet in Azië en niet in Nederland.
    1
  2052.  @kipkip4844  Je hebt zelf al de oplossing gegeven. Tegen die tijd zijn we allang in staat om fosfaten terug te winnen uit onze eigen reststromen. Mensen zijn gewoon dieren. De veehouderij is nergens voor nodig.
    1
  2053. You do realize 500 km EVs are on the market today?
    1
  2054. Will cost three times the amount of electric energy which will make the water rise even more.
    1
  2055. Aluminium air batteries have major disadvantages. It cannot be recharged for example.
    1
  2056. Het is ook gewoon negatief. Veeteelt is extreem vervuilend.
    1
  2057.  @rolypolyoranje1918  Ook vervuilend ja. Dus? Wat is je punt? Omdat andere industrieën ook vervuilend zijn betekent dit nog niet dat de veehouderij niets hoeft te veranderen.
    1
  2058.  @ansjovisnl9059  De productie van vlees en zuivel levert ook enorm veel geld op. De zware industrie ligt overigens al jaren onder vuur en ook daar zullen op termijn grote dingen gaan veranderen.
    1
  2059.  @djsly5726 jij vindt 10.000 weinig?
    1
  2060. This makes it easier for millions of people to eat less meat. Nothing wrong with that.
    1
  2061. Same applies to hydrogen cars. Answer is simple: recycling.
    1
  2062.  @alanx4121  Klopt, maar dat zijn geen nutteloze dingen.
    1
  2063.  @alanx4121  Maar vlees en zuivel zijn compleet overbodig.
    1
  2064. Yeah whatever. When something is considerably cheaper in use nobody cares about ‘culture’. By the way, using an EV creates a far wider choice of energy source.
    1
  2065. Unlikely and probably not.
    1
  2066.  @icekk007  It is very unlikely that combustion engines are able to get more efficient than they already are. It’s already at the limits that thermodynamic laws allow. And even if it would be possible, an EV would still produce far less CO2.
    1
  2067.  @Johannes-mm6dx  genau!
    1
  2068. They are facts.
    1
  2069. Reusing and eventually recycling.
    1
  2070. There is no reason to support it and it is no new technology either.
    1
  2071. They actually make 35k electric cars…
    1
  2072. Incorrect. Your numbers are far off.
    1
  2073. Modern batteries barely degrade.
    1
  2074. Alex N nope dude 😂
    1
  2075. En dan nog een keer halveren en dan nog een keer!
    1
  2076. Nope
    1
  2077. Not at all. Current battery tech is more than capable enough and will always be many times more efficient than ‘efficient’ engines running on synthetic fuels. Porsche is simply wrong.
    1
  2078.  @antonvoloshin9833  Current battery tech already performs great in passenger cars. A range of 300 to 400 km is very normal these days and charging is fast. Curb weight of the vehicles is very acceptable. Life cycle emissions are many times lower than ICE cars, despite production and mining. EVs are already highly effiecient, whereas combustion engines are not and never will be. An ICE car on synthetic fuels consumes five times as much electricity as an EV and this will never significantly improve simply because of physics.
    1
  2079.  @notnow2602  “scientific data” 😂
    1
  2080. Yes you will also own an EV.
    1
  2081.  @logitech4873  exactly
    1
  2082. Second hand Dutch? Why would that be?
    1
  2083. Super inefficient en ook nog eens explosief.
    1
  2084. Big oil loves hydrogen and that is exactly one of the reasons why it is a bad idea.
    1
  2085. How do you want to make hydrogen? Natural gas steam reforming or electrolysis?
    1
  2086. Storyline Gamer Boeren worden niet gedwongen maar uitgekocht. Kalveren gaan gewoon naar het slachthuis.
    1
  2087. jill janssen Dat is inderdaad makkelijk om te zeggen, maar het moet wel gebeuren.
    1
  2088.  @andyman8630  has been researched thoroughly, look it up
    1
  2089.  @andyman8630  It’s just physics.
    1
  2090.  @philgooddr.7850  Just throwing some numbers in the air doesn't make you right. Hydrogen combustion makes no sense.
    1
  2091. Je vraagt je af wanneer wappies gaan beseffen dat het verkleinen van de veehouderij helemaal geen honger zal veroorzaken maar onze leefomgeving juist enorm zal verbeteren.
    1
  2092. What if you fill your car with hydrogen for five years straight. Lol look hmm how much your total hydrogen bill is.
    1
  2093. of course not lol. This is an incident.
    1
  2094. tomos beuners Valt reuze mee hoor
    1
  2095. tomos beuners Nope, dat is hardnekkig nepnieuws.
    1
  2096. No, it is not. The production emissions of batteries are quickly compensated for when you start driving.
    1
  2097. ​ @chromeproduction  Depends of the manufacturer how much there is needed for a battery pack. But yes, cobalt is a bit of a concern. However, cobalt has been used for decades in various different electrical appliances (hydrogen cars included) and also the oil industry is one of the biggest consumers of cobalt for industrial catalysts (desulphurisation of fuels).
    1
  2098. Would not make a notable difference range-wise.
    1
  2099. You have no clue what you are talking about
    1
  2100. Please elaborate on 'the vehicle can produce its own fuel now'.
    1
  2101. Ja want inkomen is natuurlijk belangrijker dan het milieu 😂😂😂
    1
  2102.  @D-Ruys  Dat hoeft ook niet als je gewoon stopt met veehouderij.
    1
  2103. On board HHO generators have nothing do do with this. It's a scam.
    1
  2104. Je kunt genoeg tweedehands elektrische bussen vinden hoor.
    1
  2105.  @trottlesnot  Een nieuwe bus kost 50 - 60k. Een mooie gebruikte heb je vanaf 20k. En anders een simpele Nissan ENV200 of Renault Kangoo voor 10k.
    1
  2106. Spot on.
    1
  2107. Yeah but CO2 is the problem you know..
    1
  2108.  @mikoajzpolski5550  Lol no they do not
    1
  2109. Except for Tesla
    1
  2110. Lol it was not revolutionary and he was not killed.
    1
  2111. Wrong. The oil industry is one of the big drivers behind hydrogen adoption. They would love to see a world in which ‘gas’ stations still exist. Luckily without succes!
    1
  2112. Local batteries are simply tied in with the grid.
    1
  2113.  @peteliotas9456  yes you will
    1
  2114. But you can simply decrease the number of cows.
    1
  2115. Electrification always makes sense because it is the most efficient method.
    1
  2116. Electrification always makes sense.
    1
  2117. Diesel has no future.
    1
  2118.  @gissit1967  You have clearly no idea of the current state of battery technology and the availability of lithium. http://litio.ipg.pt/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Global-lithium-availability-A-Constraint-for-Electric-Vehicles_2011.pdf
    1
  2119.  @gissit1967  Your numbers are way off. Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are 30% efficient and BEVs are 75% efficient. A factor 2,5 difference. https://www.volkswagenag.com/en/news/stories/2019/08/hydrogen-or-battery--that-is-the-question.html We simply cannot afford to waste precious energy on hydrogen cars.
    1
  2120.  @maktiki  Zucht. Het gaat er om dat de emissies van een EV vele malen lager zijn.
    1
  2121.  @maktiki  echt he
    1
  2122. A hydrogen system is not simple at all, especially compared to a battery electric situation.
    1
  2123. sigh..
    1
  2124. It's not. You just don't like it, but that doesn't mean that it is 'nonsense'.
    1
  2125.  @DrivingElectric  Only if it weren’t so hideously inefficient and complex.
    1
  2126.  @ArmaDino22  You need breaks on long drives anyway.
    1
  2127. This is an English video
    1
  2128. Terribly inefficient
    1
  2129.  @SL4PSYM4XY  It’s just basic physics. Look up ‘battery electric vs efuels’ and you will find several explanations. And yes, even when production emissions are included EVs use far less energy. The grid will be fine as most people charge their car slowly. Apart from that the grid needs upgrading anyway as everything will become electric (heating, cooking). The coal argument is of course invalid because, again, efuels require much more of that exact same electricity.
    1
  2130.  @heavy_ang_patay  I don’t.
    1
  2131. Ever heard of CO2?
    1
  2132. Dus dan doen we maar niks?
    1
  2133. Give me one example.
    1
  2134.  @MarkTheTreeManVann  The Mirai didn't exist 16 years ago.
    1
  2135.  @raymondcanessa7208  Purchasing new ICE vehicles should be banned soon.
    1
  2136.  @raymondcanessa7208  Even using mainly natural gas to charge the EV, CO2 emissions are lower. That is why switching to EVs makes so much sense.
    1
  2137. No of course not. Where would you get the energy from for the electrolysis?
    1
  2138. Altijd weer de jankende veehouders...
    1
  2139. Yevhen Pavliuk 1. No, they will last several hundreds of thousands of kilometers 2. 14 x 35 km = 490 km in 2 weeks. Sounds like plugging in twice in stead of every night?! 3. The battery does not have to be kept warm when the car is parked.
    1
  2140. 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
  2141. Yea because fuel cells, electrolysers, solar panels and wind mills come falling from the sky for nothing..
    1
  2142.  @angus8223  I understand. But the thing is that we would need three times the amount of that same renewable energy to generate hydrogen in order to power the same amount of vehicles. So you would still need to 'tear the earth apart' to get the materials needed for three times the amount of solar panels and wind turbines.
    1
  2143. No problem sir
    1
  2144. Still much better than oil production, refinery, transport and combustion. The battery is designed for 1500 cycles so will probably outlive the vehicle itself.
    1
  2145. @Daylen Crews It would require insane amounts of energy because it is horribly inefficient.
    1
  2146.  @PG-3462  I don't think manufacturers are that concerned about lithium. It is far from rare and relatively easy to extract or mine. Materials like cobalt and nickel are much more problematic. Also, I think the main reason for the development of solid state batteries would be the performance of the battery itself (i.e. energy density) and chemical safety.
    1
  2147.  @PG-3462  A vegan diet does not require food to come from the other side of the world. Basic vegetables grow pretty much anywhere and even if it has to come from some area farther away it still is much better than animal agriculture emission wise. Also: the food for the animals would in your example have to come from far away as well so it is not a valid argument.
    1
  2148. ​ @PG-3462  1) There is plenty of protein in vegetables and plenty of fat in nuts. Of course you can live all year round without animal products. Millions of people have been doing so for a long time. All nutrients in animal products come originally from plants. The animal is just an unnecessary extra step. 2) Grass fed meat and dairy is not the solution. It is even worse because it causes many times more greenhouse gas emissions. 3) Invalid argument. Animal products are still horribly inefficient. It does not make much of a difference when they sometimes consume waste materials. There are much better solutions for organic waste streams like biogas plants. That way methane is converted to CO2 which has less of a greenhouse effect than methane itself. 4) The majority of all phosphorus mined is used for animal feed production. So it actually is the other way around, a vegan diet leads to a decrease of phosphorus mining: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/7/4/044043/meta A vegan diet is much better in pretty much any way possible because it simply decreases the amount of organic material required in general due to its overall efficiency.
    1
  2149. ​ @PG-3462  1) Not relevant. Again, having to get some food from far away is still much better than local animal agriculture. Here is a very clear report: https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/es702969f#.YLXojrrS8Rw 2) Grass fed is not the solution. Here you go: https://awellfedworld.org/issues/climate-issues/grass-fed-beef/ 3) Using food waste for methane (bio gas) production is a much better waste solution than feeding it to farm animals because it results in much lower emissions. We don't need manure as a fertilizer, it is perfectly possible to crow crops without it. Look up biocyclic vegan agriculture. 4) What are you talking about?! I am in favor of lithium mining. Look at my comment at the top. Again, the majority of phosphorus is mined for animal agriculture. And of course it is also possible to recover phosphorus from human waste streams as in pee. So once more: all the points you mentioned are absolutely no reason to maintain agriculture.
    1
  2150.  @kidvicious2227  Availability of lithium is not an issue at all.
    1
  2151.  @kidvicious2227  It is far less polluting than pumping and burning oil.
    1
  2152.  @pennynutter  All not relevant because life cycle emissions of an electric car are far lower than a comparable ICE car.
    1
  2153. Not necessary.
    1
  2154.  @Tjd1982  Of course. But even if they use non renewable energy for production, total life cycle emissions are still vastly improved compared to gasoline cars.
    1
  2155. Not really
    1
  2156.  @dwaynethemineraljohnson412  het gaat er om dat een groot deel van de samenleving er last van heeft.
    1
  2157. Nog niet alle oplossingen zijn uitgewerkt inderdaad, maar aangaande wegverkeer, verwarmen en koken is het natuurlijk allang duidelijk.
    1
  2158.  @FishFreddie  Elektrisch koken is gewoon effe wennen. Inductie werkt heel krachtig en direct. Zowel koken, verwarmen als elektrisch rijden gebeurt met de elektriciteitsmix die uit het stopcontact komt. De stroom wordt opgewekt met gascentrales, kolencentrales, wind, zon en een klein beetje kern-energie. Vele malen schoner dan diesel of benzine en het wordt tevens elk jaar nog schoner.
    1
  2159. That happened 20 years ago...
    1
  2160. In order to makes batteries and fuel cells for hydrogen cars don’t you have to mine for the materials that make up the battery and fuel cell.
    1
  2161. Because it is not possible.
    1
  2162. Making hydrogen is far less efficient. Driving on electricity is always more efficient than using an internal combustion engine because power plants are more efficient than ICEs and distribution through the grid is more efficient than using ships and tanker trucks to transport petrolium products.
    1
  2163. But it will always remain much more expensive than electricity.
    1
  2164.  @TheCyberFatih  Exactly
    1
  2165. Nope. Hydrogen cars pollute A LOT more because they consume waaay more electricity.
    1
  2166.  @ruebo2817  For that situation you will still have to create and maintain 3 to 4 times as many solar panels and windturbines compared to going for battery electric vehicles.
    1
  2167.  @colingenge9999  exactly
    1
  2168. Meh, in the near future there will be so many EVs charging at any moment of the day that there won’t be any excess power from renewables.
    1
  2169. Which is completely justified as we cannot sustain animal farming at the scale it exists today.
    1
  2170.  @Polifinario stoer man
    1
  2171. Not in cost per mile, driving comfort, noise and CO2 emissions.
    1
  2172. It's the only option there is to get emissions down.
    1
  2173.  @arogers2741  I don’t see any problem in dictating cleaner vehicles. The effects on the economy when we continue business as usual will be much worse.
    1
  2174. Hoe minder veehouders hoe beter.
    1
  2175.  @jpkramer1028  uiteraard niet
    1
  2176.  @jpkramer1028  nee
    1
  2177.  @jpkramer1028  inderdaad
    1
  2178.  @jpkramer1028  Uiteraard.
    1
  2179. Ook in Portugal, Griekenland, Zwitserland en Noorwegen zijn de prijzen hoog.
    1
  2180. Hydrogen cars will always remain inefficient.
    1
  2181. Well it's simple: despite the production emissions EVs still have far lower life cycle emissions.
    1
  2182.  @Skreebee  Nope there is not. Not a single properly peer reviewed scientific research report will support that nonsense. Total life cycle emissions of EVs are always lower than comparable gasoline or diesel vehicles. The EV compensates for its production emissions in about 4 years of driving.
    1
  2183. No you cannot. Onboard HHO generation is a famous scam.
    1
  2184.  @charleslanier1992  him is who?
    1
  2185. Not a scam ar all. You just don’t like reality.
    1
  2186. Generation of electricity will never be the problem. The only thing that matters is infrastructure.
    1
  2187. Niet echt. Gebeurt maar zeer zelden.
    1
  2188. Hydrogen does not generate power. It stores it.
    1
  2189.  @jtkrpm1 yes you will
    1
  2190.  @le6394  The point with your first comment is that I very often see people throwing around ridiculous random numbers that other people tend to repeat while they are actually far of.
    1
  2191.  @le6394  It takes only 30.000 km (20k miles), so that is 2 to 3 years!
    1
  2192. Hydrogen vehicles are not considerably lighter than battery vehicles. Hydrogen tanks and fuel cells are heavy. Hydrogen tanks also take up a lot of space. Hydrogen planes? Yes, possibly in the far future. Cooking on hydrogen? Not really. Electric cook tops are far more efficient and so are heat pumps.
    1
  2193.  @markmitchell3596  There will be plenty of trucking companies completely satisfied with electric drivetrains. The costs per mile will be much lower than diesel or hydrogen. Long haul 24hr trucking is a different story but will follow later as batteries and charging technology improves (i.e. Tesla Semi and Megachargers). I know Bosch likes hydrogen and is installing boilers in the UK. They simply like to keep things the way they are so they can keep selling appliances that burn gas. This does however not prove that it is a great idea - because it is not. Hydrogen is super inefficient and thus requires much more electricity than fully electric heating systems would.
    1
  2194. 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
  2195. EV batteries will simply be recycled just like other types of batteries have been for decades. A proper EV battery lasts 10+ years.
    1
  2196. Not at all necessary. Nobody drives 500 miles in one go. Also 150 mpg is never going to happen. Current state or internal combustion engines is pretty much at the most efficient it will ever get. This is it. Combustion engines are over.
    1
  2197. It's not. Hydrogen is mind mindbogglingly inefficient.
    1
  2198.  @librarian_maarten  Thuis waterstof maken en opslaan is helemaal niet makkelijker dan batterijen gebruiken, ook niet op de Leuvense methode. Waterstof heeft sowieso niets te zoeken in toepassingen voor consumenten.
    1
  2199.  @rosequartz7506  Daarom is het ook belangrijk onderscheid te maken tussen veehouderij en akkerbouw. Het is vrij dom om alles maar onder de noemer 'boeren' te gooien.
    1
  2200. There is no engine lol
    1
  2201.  @-Yomi  All the steps you mentioned are included in the well to wheel emissions.
    1
  2202. Why do you put spaces before periods and commas?
    1
  2203. Nee
    1
  2204.  @Joe-born1986  😂
    1
  2205.  @Joe-born1986 Ga nou even een basiscursus natuurkunde doen.
    1
  2206.  @Joe-born1986  Simpelweg niet waar. Het zijn decenniaoude samenzweringstheorieën die dit beweren. De werkelijkheid is anders. Nikola Tesla werkte aan een apparaat om elektriciteit draadloos te kunnen transporteren, dit had niets met vrije energie te maken.
    1
  2207.  @Joe-born1986  Vrije energie is nooit ontdekt
    1
  2208. But well to wheel efficiency is MUCH worse for hydrogen cars.
    1
  2209.  @niccotinamid  Unfortunately the efficiency is limited by laws of physics.
    1
  2210. nee!!!!1!
    1
  2211. The fossil industry is one of the biggest consumers of cobalt...
    1
  2212. Fantastische plannen. Fossiele energie heeft geen toekomst.
    1
  2213. No you can’t because where would that energy come from to to split the H2O?
    1
  2214.  @ncphenom2309  So.. where would the hydrogen come from to power the fuel cell?
    1
  2215.  @ncphenom2309  I am completely following. What you are proposing is not possible, as you already admit in the last sentence.
    1
  2216.  @jimurrata6785  yup
    1
  2217.  @bartjeyeyo  Zelfs ALS het vaccin minder goed zou werken, werkt het wel nog steeds. Daar gaat het om.
    1
  2218. En nog een wappie
    1
  2219.  @lhmllr  de realiteit is soms simpel
    1
  2220. How much are new batteries?????????? - Hard to predict. Doesn't really matter, current batteries last LONG. Does the electricity come from a power station?????? - Of course. Emissions are lower anyway. What is your problem? What is the pollution problem of dumping batteries????? - The won't get dumped.
    1
  2221. Exactly. And there is no need to convert the masses because hydrogen vehicles are dead anyway.
    1
  2222. It's quite rare. What do you propose instead?
    1
  2223. Charging at a fast charger does not take long. Millions of EVs have been doing fine in winter for about a decade in Norway.
    1
  2224. I looked it up: between 1 to 3 years
    1
  2225. Cameron... on board HHO generation makes no sense. It's a famous fraud.
    1
  2226. Where did you get this bullshit. Hydrogen is dead on arrival and will always remain so. Battery electric is the only solution that makes sense.
    1
  2227. Hydrogen could indeed be a viable option for seasonal energy storage, but not for peak shaving. Electric cars and smart chargers are perfect for peak shaving because they can vary the charging power based on the grid load. It also enables for bi-directional charging where EVs return amounts of energy to the grid when needed.
    1
  2228. You would need an insanely large roof to accomodate enough solar panels.
    1
  2229. Een telefoon op het dashboard is niet verboden.
    1
  2230. lol you have no clue
    1
  2231.  @bartjuhhh6416  Rijden op waterstof gaat niet efficiënter worden, dus het is einde verhaal. Auto's met een accu hebben nu al vergelijkbare actieradii als waterstofauto's en door de enorme ontwikkeling in snelladen is het 'tanken' eigenlijk ook geen probleem meer. De enige twee voordelen die er voorheen voor waterstof bestonden zijn er dus niet meer.
    1
  2232. ICE market will have to shrink fast.
    1
  2233. You are clueless. The problem is not ‘farmers’ but the meat and dairy industry. And only a tiny fraction of all this land area would solve the housing crises, so no, that is NOT the reason.
    1
  2234. Haha
    1
  2235. But swapping stations are much more sophisticated and expensive to construct than fast chargers. Fast charging will remain the preferred choice.
    1
  2236. Exactly sir.
    1
  2237. Lol there is more than enough lithium on earth. Hydrogen is horribly inefficient.
    1
  2238. Well said.
    1
  2239. Dynamic tariffs don’t exist in the USA?
    1
  2240.  @MRSketch09  I am referring to an energy contract that has variable rates through the day depending on net load and availability of energy. This is pretty normal where I live.
    1
  2241. Why do you think it will not work? There are plenty of countries on the world that show mass adoption of EVs works great.
    1
  2242.  @NickDrinksWater  Sure, nuclear will play an important role in charging EVs and powering heat pumps.
    1
  2243. The water stays on earth.
    1
  2244.  @antonyjh1234  Not true. A vegan diet is the most efficient way of using food as you don't need to feed animals first.
    1
  2245.  @antonyjh1234  Nope, that is not how it works. Livestock does not mainly eat grass. Massive amounts of land are used solely for corn and soy production for animal feed. Animal fertilizer is not required to successfully produce crops. Look up vegan organic agriculture. But even if synthetic fertilizer is used, the vegan scenario is still far more favorable. I repeat: if everybody would go vegan, the world would require LESS arable land.
    1
  2246. The range of the Ford is not realistic at all.
    1
  2247. Absolutely fantastic. We are finally there.
    1
  2248. Waterstof is super inefficiënt.
    1
  2249.  @arnoldmeulen  Daar zijn er een paar van inderdaad, maar er rijden gelukkig al veel meer elektrische bussen met accu's rond. Interessante technologie die jij beschrijft, maar het klinkt niet als iets dat ook maar een beetje in de buurt komt van de efficiëntie van een accu-auto. Door de super snelle ontwikkeling van accu's zijn alle nadelen straks verleden tijd. Een keer om de paar honderd kilometer een half uurtje aan de lader is echt geen punt.
    1
  2250.  @arnoldmeulen  Die 500 kilometer is spoedig gewoon haalbaar en tegen 2030 gewoon betaalbaar. Tevens komt het je eigen en andermans veiligheid ten goede om af en toe even pauze te houden. Daarnaast is elektrisch rijden per kilometer goedkoper.
    1
  2251.  @arnoldmeulen  Ik heb het ook niet over 2,5 uur. Dat is immers niet nodig met de toekomstige accu's. Tevens worden de auto's natuurlijk vanzelf goedkoper de komende jaren (dit is al in volle gang). Het komt allemaal goed.
    1
  2252.  @arnoldmeulen  Uiteraard dien je vaker op te laden, net zoals je vaker moet tanken.
    1
  2253. It’s just facts.
    1
  2254.  @jgappy5643  De veehouderij vervuilt echter buiten proportioneel, om over alle andere nadelen nog maar te zwijgen.
    1
  2255.  @captainsafe-a-hoe9445  Jazeker wel.
    1
  2256. 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
  2257. The grid will do fine because not everyone will be charging every day at the same moment and because smart charging systems already exist that vary the charging power according to the grid load.
    1
  2258. This van was supposed to be electric. That is what makes it so unique. The T7 hybrid has been on the market for years in Europe.
    1
  2259. Mines???
    1
  2260.  @ronwalker4998  First generation of what? Vehicles?
    1
  2261.  @ronwalker4998  What is your source for the 250 years? And obviously materials will be recycled (especially copper) after the first generation.
    1
  2262.  @jaridevos1040  Je hoeft niet zo te schreeuwen Jari. En ja, ik weet hoe accu's gemaakt worden. Kobalt wordt inderdaad soms onder twijfelachtige omstandigheden gewonnen, dat is een kwalijke zaak, maar kobalt wordt ook gebruikt in waterstofauto's en heel veel elektronische apparaten en wordt ook gebruikt om brandstof te ontzwavelen in raffinaderijen. Je hebt dus altijd met kobalt te maken. De CO2-uitstoot van de productie van accu's is circa 100 kg per kWh. Dit wordt eenvoudig gecompenseerd tijdens het rijden. Elektrisch rijden is de beste optie voor het klimaat.
    1
  2263.  @mikedubovs1574  yeah the famous scammer
    1
  2264. Lol of course not. Batteries are far superior.
    1
  2265. Guess what has been happening for years? Exactly that. There are several subsea cables going from Norway to other European countries in order to sell the electricity.
    1
  2266. Too inefficient. 👎🏻👎🏻
    1
  2267. So tell me, what kind of miraculously reliable source would you prefer instead?
    1
  2268.  @ianhamilton3113  yup..
    1
  2269. Sounds great to me.
    1
  2270. Je mag geen enkele link plaatsten op youtube. Ze worden gewoon automatisch verwijderd. Wind op land en op zee zijn beide nodig en leveren beide veel op. Wind op land is bijvoorbeeld veel goedkoper te bouwen en vergt lagere investeringen in de infrastructuur.
    1
  2271.  @westwal1  Dat klopt. Dit heet curtailment. Komt ook voor bij windturbines op land.
    1
  2272. You forgot to check the natural gas price? It has been back at pre-war levels for over a year.
    1
  2273. Yes, you and Alan Fisher are right but that does not mean we should not develop electric vehicles. Outside of urban areas we will still need more sustainable ways of transport.
    1
  2274. Batteries
    1
  2275.  @richardalfaro4933  Read the article.
    1
  2276. Zeekr is available in several European countries, Australia, Israel and Singapore.
    1
  2277.  @ramondejesusperez1428  Sure, but like I said: A LOT LESS than a hydrogen car requires (the factor is 2 to 3). Batteries do not need replacing in modern EVs. Scotty Kilmer is a nice guy but he doesn’t know shit about EVs.
    1
  2278. By what?
    1
  2279. Not at all. Synthetic fuels are terribly inefficient.
    1
  2280. They have been getting less expensive every year.
    1
  2281. The more EVs there are, the less surplus there will be. There is currently no considerable amount of surplus to produce hydrogen in a commercially viable manner.
    1
  2282. But far cleaner than anything else.
    1
  2283.  @racevoltGamerthemecedesguy  Depends on many factors, but even 20% reduction is worth it as the EV becomes cleaner every year as renewable energy production increases.
    1
  2284. 230 Volts, max. 13 Amps, so about 3 kW.
    1
  2285. It won't. Battery technology is far superior.
    1
  2286. Pretty much all road vehicles will become battery electric. Hydrogen will simply remain too inefficient.
    1
  2287. @ Selbstverständlich. Aber mann muss es vergleichen mit ähnliche Neuwagen Campers.
    1
  2288. wat bedoel je?
    1
  2289. LOL you don't realize how much electricity is required to make hydrogen?
    1
  2290. Hydrogen will always remain super inefficient. It's not a solution at all.
    1
  2291.  @AdLockhorst-bf8pz je hebt zelf al de oplossing gegeven, het is niet moeilijk.
    1
  2292.  @AdLockhorst-bf8pz  Voor smart laden heb je geen elektriciens nodig. Het is puur een softwarematige oplossing.
    1
  2293. He did that. That's what well to wheel emissions are about.
    1
  2294. Why not?
    1
  2295. Ja want echte auto’s doen broembroem en hebben een uitlaat waar rook uit komt… 😵‍💫
    1
  2296.  @freeman405  Deels door stimulatie van de overheid sinds de jaren 50 en de propaganda om zuivelconsumptie te verhogen.
    1
  2297.  @freeman405  Je hebt duidelijk geen idee van de cijfers. De Nederlandse bevolking is sinds 1950 nog niet eens verdubbeld terwijl bijvoorbeeld het aantal varkens in de veehouderij verzevenvoudigd is.
    1
  2298.  @erikdejong9728  Om verdere beschadiging aan het milieu en klimaatverandering te voorkomen.
    1
  2299.  @opoxious1592  Als je er anno 2024 in slaagt dit soort onzin te verkondigen dan bewijst dat dat je nog nooit moeite hebt gedaan je fatsoenlijk te informeren.
    1
  2300. Not at all as 90% of charging happens at home.
    1
  2301.  @scoobyflew  Obviously they will use public curbside AC charging as has been the case for a decade in many European cities.
    1
  2302. Hydrogen cars have batteries too.
    1
  2303. There is no energy created.
    1
  2304.  @miguellopez3392  Exactly.
    1
  2305.  @scrubwasher4452  Continuous production and combustion of fossil fuels is far worse than the production of any metal.
    1
  2306. Goeie!
    1
  2307. 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
  2308. Charlie Horse In my comment I explained why it is a useless idea.
    1
  2309.  @marcelkroeze7580  Eiegenlijk niet.
    1
  2310. hydrogen is the fuel, not the construction of the car.
    1
  2311. Nope
    1
  2312.  @technologynewsplanet1782  EVs are everywhere
    1
  2313. EV is the future.
    1
  2314. It was a scam
    1
  2315. You forgot about CO2.
    1
  2316. Supercharging is very fast dude.
    1
  2317.  @NightBreakerDK  Depends on where you live. Tesla supercharger network is really well covered in Europe and North America which makes road tripping very easy. The charger plugs are already standardized.
    1
  2318. Yup
    1
  2319. "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
  2320. You forgot about the energy that is required to do the onboard electrolysis.
    1
  2321. Ezio R. Giordanelli Lopez HHO is a fraud, period. It is simply not possible due to some simple laws of physics.
    1
  2322. Lol you need electricity to make hydrogen. LOTS of electricity.
    1
  2323. Current battery tech is fine.
    1
  2324.  @nobatteryelectricvehicles7659  10% degradation of a large battery pack is nothing.
    1
  2325.  @nobatteryelectricvehicles7659  It will simply be a matter of law enforcement eventually.
    1
  2326.  @nobatteryelectricvehicles7659  Governments will prohibit sales of new ICE cars in 10 years in many European countries. Other parts of the world will follow soon. There is no choice, it’s the only way to lower transport emissions considerably.
    1
  2327.  @nobatteryelectricvehicles7659  Not at all. Again: e-fuels would require 4 times the energy and still involves tailpipe emissions. Generating electricity, turning it into liquid fuels and then burning it in an ICE is mind bogglingly stupid.
    1
  2328. Ze kunnen (moeten) een nog veel prachtiger Brits / Nederlands bedrijf worden als ze serieus mee gaan doen met de energietransitie.
    1
  2329. Hydrogen tanks tend to leak A LOT more than batteries lose their charge. Battery production may cause more emissions than fuel cell production, but are highly efficient the rest of their lives. Fuel cells remain super inefficient their entire lives.
    1
  2330.  @hjjung98  Hydrogen gas is a very small molecule wich makes it hard store for longer periods of time. Batteries easily hold their charge for months. Cobalt content in Tesla batteries is already very low and will soon be a thing of the past. Fuel cell efficiency is only a small part of the story. You are forgetting about losses during electrolysis, compression, transport. Losses in electricity grid distribution and charging are way less than that: https://insideevs.com/news/332584/efficiency-compared-battery-electric-73-hydrogen-22-ice-13/ Electric trucks already exist and Tesla will soon be joining this market. Even for trucks hydrogen seems to be losing it.
    1
  2331. ​ @hjjung98  Alright, so lets leave the 'leakage' of energy out of the equation for both batteries and hydrogen storage tanks. This isn't a problem anyway because most people very rarely leave their vehicle parked continuously for longer periods of time.
    1
  2332. Nope.
    1
  2333. you are clueless
    1
  2334. Source: trust me bro
    1
  2335. ICE vehicles burn far more often and are far worse regarding driving experience, CO2 emissions, noise, maintenance cost and acceleration.
    1
  2336. Fantastisch. En dan de veehouderij zo snel mogelijk opdoeken.
    1
  2337.  @theokoning2198  bijvoorbeeld.
    1
  2338. It is a whole lot better than cars driving on diesel or gasoline.
    1
  2339.  @clayallsman4471  Driving electric is always cleaner, even on coal. Michal Moore doesn’t know anything, his documentary is completely out of date and based on wrong data.
    1
  2340. Not more efficient at all. Show me where that 70% comes from.
    1
  2341. Water is not hydrogen
    1
  2342. Hydrogen is hideously inefficient. Hydrogen depends on THREE TIMES that amount of conventional sources to make it.
    1
  2343. It's not.
    1
  2344. Lol I knew Fox News was dumb, but I didn’t expect this. Holy crap.
    1
  2345. Well said
    1
  2346. It's the carbon you put in the tank..
    1
  2347. Exactly sir.
    1
  2348.  @GavinLawrence747  Not relevant. For meat and dairy production are enormous amounts of plants required. If you want to keep ‘plant suffering’ to a minimum, going vegan is the best choice.
    1
  2349.  @GavinLawrence747  It’s clear that he is referring to creatures that have a central nervous system.
    1
  2350. 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
  2351. katinka De Rijk Kakken kunnen we moeilijk mee stoppen he.
    1
  2352. HFCEVs do require batteries lol
    1
  2353. 12.5 kW is not enough to keep a van like this rolling on the highway. You need at least 30 kW.
    1
  2354. Not relevant, electric is always cleaner - no matter the energy source.
    1
  2355. "the battery is 30% of weight, so 30% of energy loss" Lol what kind of equation is that? EVs are 70 to 80% efficient, including all the aspects you mentioned.
    1
  2356. In pretty much any way possible.
    1
  2357. Geen gek idee.
    1
  2358. Well said.
    1
  2359. 3:30 incorrect. There is also a train ferry between Denmark and Germany.
    1
  2360. Wait, you didn’t watch the video?
    1
  2361.  @a_spire  8:22
    1
  2362.  @TheEsseboy  thanks
    1
  2363. Well the nice thing about electrification is that overall energy demand will decrease.
    1
  2364.  @anthonymorris5084  Because electric appliances like EVs and heatpumps are far more efficient.
    1
  2365. Hydrogen is not a thing in Europe either (Germany has a few stations but that is about it). Everyone is focused on battery electric cars. Same for China.
    1
  2366.  @petesmitt  Yes, they will be around for a pretty much long time, but the numbers will be very low.
    1
  2367. Neehoor, dat is helemaal niet het geval. Waarom denk je dat?
    1
  2368.  @ercanyilmaz8108  Bij elektrische auto’s is het erg zeldzaam.
    1
  2369. Wordt al veelvuldig gedaan op hoogspanningsniveau.
    1
  2370. When you look at CO2 emissions it’s the other way around.
    1
  2371. Warranty is 8 years most of the time and the batteries will last a lot longer than that.
    1
  2372. Sure, but that requires transmission capacity
    1
  2373. Hydrogen is incredibly inefficient. Batteries are far better and yes, they can be recycled.
    1
  2374.  @Danster82  Haha you are betting against physics.
    1
  2375. It's not three hours...
    1
  2376.  @madrabbit9007  At home. Read the text at 2:38
    1
  2377. Nee grapjas. Bij huizenbouw komt ook veel stikstof vrij.
    1
  2378.  @davidbrayshaw3529  EVs automatically store loads of renewable energy because, like you said, they are doing nothing 23 hours per day. There is always an average number of EVs charging at any given time.
    1
  2379.  @MicroClases_Ciencia  All technology is here. It all comes down to investing right now. And we were talking about cars, but ships and planes aren't far away either. Battery electric container ships already exist.
    1
  2380.  @308_Negra_Arroyo_Lane  exactly
    1
  2381.  @asaha7547 Interesting question as numbers of EVs with LFP batteries seem to increase rapidly.
    1
  2382. Not at all. EVs are barely heavier than hydrogen cars. Also, weight barely affects overal efficiency.
    1
  2383. They are not.
    1
  2384. About 26.9 kWh/100 km.
    1
  2385. Is ook zo
    1
  2386. Du bist in 2005 hängen geblieben?
    1
  2387. Plastics are only a TINY part of oil consumption.
    1
  2388. 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
  2389. Does your city not provide curbside charging spots? Long distance driving is fine by the way.
    1
  2390. It's about the total emissions produced during the car's entire life. Which is clearly a lot lower for an EV.
    1
  2391.  @andrevdende8244 Ja natuurlijk. Wat denk jij dan? Benzine en diesel is gewoon voorbij over niet al te lange tijd.
    1
  2392.  @marune1975  nope
    1
  2393. @ kan prima
    1
  2394. It’s not. Hydrogen is far too inefficient.
    1
  2395.  @gaborpapp9388  Excellent argument.
    1
  2396.  @gaborpapp9388  Battery electric obviously.
    1
  2397.  @gaborpapp9388  Of course.
    1
  2398. Een waterstofauto is gewoon een EV met een brandstofcel erbij gepropt. Inclusief lithium-ionaccu, maar dan een beetje kleiner.
    1
  2399. @droods The point is that the cows should not have been born in the first place.
    1
  2400. Good question. 3k sounds very cheap for NYC rent?!
    1
  2401. 'Fancy chargers' only require 20 minutes of charging before hitting the road for another 300 kilometers for a fraction of the cost. Hydrogen is over already.
    1
  2402.  @nope1918  I know that. The funny thing is, you don't need to charge to 100% because with currently technology 80% already provides you with a few hundred kilometers of range. You need to take a break anyway (eat, pee, take a dump), so why not charge for 20 minutes at the same time. Charging at home often takes place while you sleep.
    1
  2403.  @nope1918  How many miles do you drive per day? EVs are perfect for 90% of the people because of ther limited daily mileage and the existing infrastructure. Regarding current technology: the Tesla Model S Long Range has the same range as a Toyota Mirai. Teslas charge really fast so this would barely make any difference opposed to filling up hydrogen (which is not as fast as filling up gasoline). Investing in fuel cell tech and infrastructure now would be an insane waste of money and energy and is completely unnecessary.
    1
  2404. nope You can easily do that in a Tesla. If you combine that home charging with Supercharging it is literally no problem. You are seeing obstacles that are not there. Again: current Teslas drive as far as a Mirai and Supercharging is not considerably slower than filling hydrogen. It’s 2020, not 2010. Also: cost per mile is much lower.
    1
  2405. nope Then I would suggest to simply keep driving your ICE car. Superchargers and other fast chargers will be there within a few years. Hydrogen filling stations will not.
    1
  2406. Nope. It’s not the same. Battery materials only need to be mined once. Petroleum products over and over.
    1
  2407.  @cobrabite2291  Fuel cells, tanks and the batteries in hydrogen cars also require mining and recycling while the car is also super inefficient during its entire lifetime.
    1
  2408.  @G-Cam1  Spot on
    1
  2409.  @SHAMzila85  There is lots of electronics, platinum and even batteries required to build hydrogen cars. Battery production emissions average at about 100 kg of CO2 per kWh. This is compensated for after about 4 years of driving. A hydrogen car is inefficient its entire life - causing lots of CO2 emissions from hydrogen production.
    1
  2410.  @SHAMzila85  It’s just simple physics. Hydrogen has aways been and will always remain very inefficient compared to battery electric. Therefore battery electric will always cause less CO2 emissions.
    1
  2411.  @SHAMzila85  Lol electric cars have been working perfectly fine in the real world for the past 10 years. Toyota is also investing in EVs.
    1
  2412.  @SHAMzila85  Petrol stations with fast chargers can charge a vehicle within half an hour. Far cheaper and easy to scale. No problem at all. In the country where I live chargers are everywhere already and they are expanding on a daily basis.
    1
  2413.  @SHAMzila85  resulting in far higher CO2 emissions lol
    1
  2414.  @SHAMzila85  Material mining only happens once and is far less of a problem than CO2.
    1
  2415.  @SHAMzila85  Haha the famous child labour argument. Guess who is still one of the biggest consumers of cobalt? The oil industry. Cobalt is in many different electronic products, including hydrogen cars.
    1
  2416.  @SHAMzila85  The point is that shady mining activities have nothing specifically to do with electric cars so your argument makes no sense.
    1
  2417.  @SHAMzila85  There is no hydrogen infrastructure.
    1
  2418. EV incentives exist to help people afford EVs.
    1
  2419. And that's exactly why they don't make sense. 1. The fuel is expensive 2. The vehicles are inefficient 3. You have to refuel at filling stations 4. They require a lot of maintenance 5. They are slow.
    1
  2420. 2. Common misconception. Even with current grid energy mix electric driving is cleaner. 3. This only counts in very bad air situations. Air coming out is a bit less polluting than what came in, doesn't really solve any problem.
    1
  2421.  @oliverlison  EV's are more efficient so the total energy consumption will go down. Period. Supply is not something to worry about, EV's often charge during low demand in the night.
    1
  2422.  @oliverlison  You could easily do 300 to 500 miles a day in a modern EV. Especially a Tesla would seriously be really easy with the Supercharger network, but even other EV's are capable of delivering similar performance with the ever growing fast chargers of Ionity and Fastned.
    1
  2423. Lol not at all.
    1
  2424. 1. Invalid argument. In this situation we are able to make a choice between something horribly inefficient and something very efficient. 2. I don't see your problem. So what? As soon as you have the car you are able to choose whatever source of electricty you like - and even generate your own. In case of hydrogen you will be tied to a few hydrogen filling stations and it's companies determining the price. 3. Weight does not have a great impact on efficiency. The Mirai is nog a lot lighter than an average EV. 4. Modern batteries do in fact last long and next gen Tesla batteries will last even longer. In case of battery failure only certain modules have to be replaced costing a few thousand dollars after many years of use. Probably a LOT cheaper than maintaining a FCEV and its fuel cell replacement. By the way, FCEV's also have battery packs.
    1
  2425. Lol it's not. It's just physics. Hydrogen is dumb.
    1
  2426. ‘Have several cars’?
    1
  2427. Because internal combustion engines will never be as clean as electric drivetrains.
    1
  2428. What about all the issues with mining platinum for the fuel cells?
    1
  2429. Power stations never over produce. Every kWh that is consumed is produced simulatiously.
    1
  2430.  @whocares264  That’s how it works. The grid frequency can only be maintained if production and consumption are exactly equal.
    1
  2431.  @whocares264  That’s called base load, not over production. And yes, power stations are constantly adjusting up and down.
    1
  2432.  @whocares264  I repeat it one more time: every kWh that is produced is consumed. You simply can’t over produce because otherwise the voltage and the frequency would go completely bonkers resulting in a blackout. Off peak energy is cheap because demand is low.
    1
  2433. 'commercial threat' 😂😂😂😂😂
    1
  2434. Verzin wat nieuws man.
    1
  2435. Lol
    1
  2436. De olie-industrie is nog altijd een van de grootste afnemers van kobalt, grapjas.
    1
  2437. You think we have the time to just 'let in come in'?!
    1
  2438.  @Jeffrey_Gauntt  It’s not. CO2 emissions need to come down as fast as possible.
    1
  2439. It’s very simple: total CO2 emissions of an EV are far lower.
    1
  2440. Depends on the country. Emissions are aways lower than hydrogen per km of course.
    1
  2441. Yes you will.
    1
  2442.  @rickitysplitz7035  Carbon tax is far more likely to decide that.
    1
  2443. Het idee is juist dat je zelf je energie gaat opslaan.
    1
  2444. 1. FCEVs are about as heavy as an equal EV and consist of way more components. The fuel itself only weighs 5 to 6 kilograms. 2. Fast charging regularly takes less than half an hour. 3. Fuel cells don’t grow on trees either and wear out as well. FCEVs also contain (small) lithium batteries. 4. Efficiency is a key property when it comes to lowering emissions as fast as possible.
    1
  2445.  @robi4387  But that is not relevant.
    1
  2446. 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
  2447. Smith Aviation Refinements yea
    1
  2448. Would love to know too.
    1
  2449. More like 2%
    1
  2450. Yes, but roundtrip efficiency of ~50% is still quite bad. You also need energy for compression.
    1
  2451. Sounds like simple physics!
    1
  2452. Not really. EV emission gains are pretty significant, even if non renewable energy is used to charge them.
    1
  2453. Only certain plants grow well on N but others don’t. This causes decrease of biodiversity.
    1
  2454. Ok jij bent echt de überwappie
    1
  2455. No, nitrous oxide. Methane is another problem with cows indeed, but that is a different story.
    1
  2456. Will never happen. Fuel cells are dead for cars and definitely for small cars.
    1
  2457. Lol
    1
  2458. Windmolens zijn onmisbaar voor de energietransitie en doden geen vissen en nauwelijks vogels.
    1
  2459.  @benbontjer  Ik heb al lang niet meer zoveel onzin in één enkele reactie tegelijk voorbij zien komen.
    1
  2460. Not at all.
    1
  2461.  @showmytime9177  Not remotely comparable. Data is clear and has been for years.
    1
  2462.  @showmytime9177  Again, data doesn’t lie. You just feel uncomfortable with change.
    1
  2463.  @showmytime9177 Again, just because you think it is comparable doesn’t mean it is true.
    1
  2464.  @showmytime9177  Total life cycle emissions of an EV are a lot lower. That is just simple data. Price parity is pretty much there so I don’t see any problem removing incentives.
    1
  2465. Because it would require a gigantic onboard source of energy.
    1
  2466. What’s wrong with a society?
    1
  2467. Een elektrische boiler is heel goedkoop in aanschaf.
    1
  2468. EVs are far cleaner than any fossil fuel driven solution.
    1
  2469. Over here in Europe Shell and BP are already heavily involved in installing fast chargers at their stations.
    1
  2470. yea but you need to make it first
    1
  2471. lol
    1
  2472. Too complicated and battery technology advancements will soon make such vehicles obsolete before a hydrogen ecosystem gets the chance to develop.
    1
  2473. layerdballoon Lol of course it won’t.
    1
  2474. layerdballoon Because it is useless
    1
  2475. layerdballoon There is no need to change gears at all. It is just a fixed reduction.
    1
  2476.  @layerdballoonswe  Electric motors can be reversed, unlike internal combustion engines. They also do not need to keep running when you stand still, so a physical neutral is not required either.
    1
  2477.  @layerdballoonswe  I am saying that the electric motor is directly connected to the driveshaft of the wheels. Always. No gears to shift.
    1
  2478. layerdballoon Again, the electric motor is always connected to the wheels. By pressing a switch you tell the motor to spin forward or backward.
    1
  2479.  @layerdballoonswe  Yea sort of. But not mechanically. Of course you can attach some sort of a stalk or lever to that switch to give you a more nostalgic feel haha.
    1
  2480. Not simple at all.
    1
  2481. Any mass produced product is bad for the environment.
    1
  2482.  @chrissinclair4442  But you need a lot more electric energy to feed them, so that means we have to build and maintain 3x as many wind turbines and solar panels.
    1
  2483. Wonderful argument 😂😂 So we will simply stick to super inefficient and polluting manual transmission combustion engine cars ONLY because this would improve ‘skill’. LOL
    1
  2484. Vi B EV adoptation will soon be a matter of legislation, not a matter of choice. I have driven manual transmission cars all my life but I love automatics because you can concentrate 100% on the road.
    1
  2485. Vi B But EVs brake heavily on the motor (regen) when you let go of the gas 😉
    1
  2486. Not at all. Hydrogen. Will. Always. Remain. Inefficient.
    1
  2487. Cannot be improved indefinitely. The only sensible next step is fully electric.
    1
  2488. Guess what, electrons are even more sustainable. You are comparing the wrong things.
    1
  2489.  @John-bs5ug  LED is not new at all.
    1
  2490. No they are not. Hydrogen is horribly inefficient. Batteries are recyclable.
    1
  2491. You really think it makes sense to continue making ICE cars?
    1
  2492. Precies
    1
  2493. Electric cars are always cleaner so it is not relevant.
    1
  2494.  @playboyharishkathu  EVs are cleaner than diesel or petrol cars per kilometer. Current batteries will outlast the car.
    1
  2495. Range is very usable in countless of use cases.
    1
  2496.  @brushlessmotoring  Exactly.
    1
  2497. De toekomst is gewoon zonder melk en vlees.
    1
  2498. gebeurt allang
    1
  2499. Wrong. Big oil loves hydrogen and that is exactly one of the reasons we shouldn't want this.
    1
  2500. Wrong. Pretty much all soy is produced specifically for animal feed stock. And apart from that a lot of corn and fodder beet.
    1
  2501. Wrong. Hydrogen will always remain inefficient, that has nothing to do with the number of refilling stations. Excess renewable power will be consumed by charging cars.
    1
  2502. not really
    1
  2503. Akkerbouwers moeten inderdaad met rust gelaten worden ja, maar daar gaat dit item niet over.
    1
  2504. You mean storage in the form of hydrogen?
    1
  2505. Still the cleanest solution.
    1
  2506. exactly
    1
  2507. There is more lithium on earth than we will ever need. Also: we would need far more copper to build all the wind turbines and solar panels required for hydrogen production (3 times as much).
    1
  2508.  @tim3440 Natuurlijk kan dat wel.
    1
  2509. Omdat elektrische auto's veel efficiënter zijn dan een auto met een verbrandingsmotor ooit zal kunnen bereiken.
    1
  2510. BSR Polsbroek Ik heb het over energetische efficiëntie. Een elektrische auto verbruikt nog geen 0,2 kWh per kilometer. Een benzineauto al gauw 0,7 kWh.
    1
  2511. Hydrogen cars are barely lighter than BEVs. Weight is not a huge factor to energy consumption.
    1
  2512. Jij houdt niet van schone lucht?
    1
  2513. Het gebrek aan kennis is inderdaad indrukwekkend.
    1
  2514. EVs are by far the least polluting option there is. And no, water does not disappear during production.
    1
  2515. Wrong. If hydrogen was a bright idea, Elon would have implemented this technology in Tesla cars.
    1
  2516. Not at all. It is in fact the most efficient and direct way.
    1
  2517. Hydrogen is not and will not be the leader.
    1
  2518. You have no clue. The world will never go back to fossil fuels. EVs are here to stay. You better get used to it.
    1
  2519. Exactly
    1
  2520.  @didierpuzenat7280 exactly
    1
  2521. That is a common misconception. We won't be charging all at the same time and we only need about 10 kWh a day on average.
    1
  2522.  @gitmoholliday5764  Met akkerbouw is veel minder mis dan met veehouderij. Bovendien: 40% van alle akkerbouw bestaat om de veehouderij van veevoer te voorzien. Als de veehouderij verdwijnt is er dus automatisch ook veel minder akkerbouw nodig.
    1
  2523.  @agegroot5666  Precies.
    1
  2524. Far less than burning fossil fuels does.
    1
  2525. There is no other option.
    1
  2526. Lol how should it do that
    1
  2527.  @koffiegast  Niks is perfect, maar gewoon stoppen met dierlijke producten maakt al een enorm verschil en is heel makkelijk.
    1
  2528.  @Josh77600  Wat is je probleem met supplementen?
    1
  2529.  @Josh77600  Dieren in de veehouderij krijgen ook supplementen toegediend. Het direct consumeren van groente en supplementen is uiteraard vele malen efficiënter en niet minder natuurlijk.
    1
  2530.  @oroget9211  Shampoo en mayonaise kan prima zonder dierlijke producten.
    1
  2531.  @oroget9211  Klopt. Maar meestal zijn mensen die geen dierlijke producten eten zich hier wel van bewust.
    1
  2532. 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
  2533. Fool cells ^^
    1
  2534. Echt he..
    1
  2535. Verzin wat nieuws man
    1
  2536. Far worse
    1
  2537. Lol electric is the future. There is no other option.
    1
  2538. Sounds really cheap from a European perspective.
    1
  2539. Nope
    1
  2540. It always amuses me that so many people still do not understand that EVs are always emitting less CO2 than any fossil fueled version - even on non renewable electricity.
    1
  2541.  @mexhitademi3573  Haha ja laten we lekker op andere landen gaan zitten wachten. Hoe stel je je dat dan voor? Dat die landen ook weer landen gaan aanwijzen waar zij op gaan zitten wachten? En bovendien: overal ter wereld gaat veehouderij gepaard met extreme vervuiling en het mishandelen en vermoorden van dieren, in Nederland net zo goed.
    1
  2542.  @hugow.5973  Voor akkerbouw ja, niet voor veeteelt.
    1
  2543. The truckstop doesn’t need to generate electricity, the grid will supply the energy generated by different sources including gas and coal if necessary. A stationary battery pack can be added to the DC chargers for load balancing. Making hydrogen requires 3 times more energy for the same number of trucks and will be far more expensive.
    1
  2544.  @k1fizz  Exactly. It is important to know that EVs on fossil electricity are still a very efficient solution and save a lot of CO2 compared to driving on diesel. And hydrogen is, like I said, just too inefficient.
    1
  2545.  @k1fizz  Hydrogen vehicles consume more energy, so no, they are not better in lowering CO2 emissions.
    1
  2546.  @k1fizz  FCEV requires far more electric energy so it would never be possible to only rely on renewable energy to produce it.
    1
  2547.  @k1fizz  Grid upgrades + stationary battery storage will slash the need for curtailment a lot. Curtailment often is a solution for distribution problems, not demand problems. Making hydrogen from renewable energy remains a massive waste as the same amount of energy could have powered three times as many EVs.
    1
  2548. So... the energy for that electrolysis comes from where exactly?
    1
  2549.  @cerimite7674  Doesn’t that require electricity?
    1
  2550.  @JohnnyPreston6699  wrong
    1
  2551.  @jec_ecart  lol not even close
    1
  2552.  @wolfalaska7638  not true. There is more than enough material.
    1
  2553.  @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
  2554.  @user-uu6bi4tn5o  Exactly. Lithium-ion is here to stay.
    1
  2555. Not at all. We all know factory farming and its products is far more harmful for humans and planet earth.
    1
  2556. Incorrect. The future and lifecycle emissions of EVs is perfectly known.
    1
  2557. 40.000
    1
  2558. Lets say all the sreens and the electronics behind it consume 500 watts. That would be 0.5 kWh per hour of driving. That's less than 3 kilometers of range!
    1
  2559.  @johnra-x8p  Behalve dat de accu langer meegaat dan de rest van de auto.
    1
  2560. Yes they are. You just refused to inform yourself.
    1
  2561. Nothing wrong with lithium mate
    1
  2562. sigh
    1
  2563. Not for long.
    1
  2564. lol
    1
  2565.  @chris52386  lookup Flettner rotors
    1
  2566. wat bedoel je?
    1
  2567. This video is not great work at all.
    1
  2568.  @BrutusAlbion Jawel. Heel weinig zelfs. Zijn genoeg cijfers van te vinden.
    1
  2569.  @thebrowns5337  Guess what, hydrogen cars also require lithium and much rarer materials like platinum. Good luck with that.
    1
  2570. It's very inefficient compared to battery electric and even hydrogen fuel cells.
    1
  2571. no
    1
  2572. Stel je niet aan. Jij prefereert slechte lucht?
    1
  2573. It's not relevant. Electric cars do not need to be 'really clean'. They only need to be cleaner than the alternatives. And that's what they are.
    1
  2574.  @weertgilders8172  Veel andere landen hebben dezelfde problemen met de netcapaciteit als Nederland en zetten alsnog in op elektrificatie (terecht). Het is een fabeltje dat gas als grote oplossing wordt gezien in landen als bijvoorbeeld Duitsland.
    1
  2575.  @mrgurulittle7000  all of that still does not mean it is worse than fossil fuel powered cars. Countless research has proven you wrong. Total lifecycle emissions of an EV are always lower.
    1
  2576.  @mrgurulittle7000  Of course it is. A vehicle that is a bit cleaner nowadays, is A LOT cleaner in 10 years. Every EV that is sold gets cleaner every year. Each fossil car that is sold is just as polluting in 10 years as it is today. Hybrid cars are powered by fossil fuels and therefore produce more emissions during their lifecycle than EVs. By the way: you do realize the fossil industry receives billions of taxpayer's money every year?
    1
  2577.  @mrgurulittle7000  Not at all. Hydrogen consumes three times as much energy. EVs are the best solution to lower carbon emissions as fast as possible. Also hydrogen cars will be obsolete soon as current EVs are already capable of equal driving range requiring only 1/3rd of the energy.
    1
  2578.  @a.jvalle8905  So you want to rely on hydrogen made from electricity?
    1
  2579.  @mrgurulittle7000  I already explained to you that EVs are cleanER - and not 100% clean (nothing is). Yes, even when mainly fossil electricity is used. Read the research reports that are widely availabe. And again: hydrogen fuel cell cars consume three times as much electricity so will always remain more polluting. The process of manufacturing hydrogen cars also involves mining for platinum, cobalt, nickel and lithium.
    1
  2580.  @mrgurulittle7000  Again: research and physics are clear: battery electric is the least polluting option. Hydrogen cars consume 3X more electricity and not ‘a bit’. If you like fast refueling, fine. But that is the one and only advantage of hydrogen cars (if you can find a station). And no, hybrid cars are not the cleanest solution.
    1
  2581.  @mrgurulittle7000  It's about both. Physics proves that hydrogen is a bad idea because it requires many times more energy. So it is a bad choice to begin with when you want to lower CO2 emissions. Just like with electric heating: heat pumps are far more efficient than resistive heaters and therefore the preferred choice.
    1
  2582.  @mrgurulittle7000  Yes they do lower CO2 enough. Also: Every EV that is sold now will produce less CO2 every year. Every hybrid and fossil car sold today is just as polluting in 10 years as it is today.
    1
  2583.  @mrgurulittle7000  I already explained that life cycle emissions of EVs are lower (this means that they do last long enough to compensate for production emissions). To give you an idea: it takes about 4 years to breakeven when using average grid electricity. An EV easily lasts 10+ years. EV prices have been dropping like crazy over the last 2 years and continues to do so. Yes, public charging prices are volatile but so are gasoline prices.
    1
  2584.  @mrgurulittle7000  Not at all. The batteries last just as long as the vehicle. You are referring to first generation EVs from 10 years ago.
    1
  2585.  @mrgurulittle7000  Prices are dropping a lot, just follow the news.
    1
  2586.  @mrgurulittle7000  It will be quite soon.
    1
  2587.  @mrgurulittle7000  Prices have been dropping a lot over the past years and this will continue to do so. I do not claim anyone can afford one yet. But the difference is shrinking and shrinking.
    1
  2588.  @mrgurulittle7000  Of course they will.
    1
  2589. Car emissions are always only measured at tail pipe level. So yes, they are in fact zero emission vehicles.
    1
  2590. M M get your facts together. Don’t spread BS.
    1
  2591. Yes they are
    1
  2592. Nou dan kun je nu stoppen met lekker doen wat je wil mbt milieu.
    1
  2593. Grapjas. Leg anders even uit hoe je het zorginfarct wil oplossen 😂
    1
  2594.  @Fjodor.Tabularasa  Het is duidelijk je er geen reet van begrijpt. Ik hoop dat je zelf zorg nodig hebt binnenkort.
    1
  2595.  @Fjodor.Tabularasa  Nee jij komt daarentegen met een lekker coherent verhaal.
    1
  2596.  @Fjodor.Tabularasa  Wat een slecht verhaal 😂😂
    1
  2597. Great base for a diy conversion 😀
    1
  2598. Nope. Electric cares are better DESPITE the emissions that are related to the production of them.
    1
  2599. Bob Lazar was a famous fraudster and his 'invention' has nothing to do with the technology seen in this video.
    1
  2600. So you think “soul” is more important than CO2 emissions?
    1
  2601. Auto's met een verbrandingsmotor vliegen daarentegen nooit in brand inderdaad..
    1
  2602. 😂
    1
  2603. Dat vissers het beter hebben is niets positiefs hoor.
    1
  2604.  @bibia336  Wat een onzin. Vis hebben we niet nodig.
    1
  2605. Wieso ‘extra’? Die Länder heißen heutzutage auch schon.
    1
  2606.  @lhamel7038  Always inefficient.
    1
  2607. But what about emissions and animal welfare?
    1
  2608. Een eigen reservewiel laten plaatsen is met pechhulp van anwb uiteraard gratis.
    1
  2609.  @Highfreqgaming As long as he is CEO he should just shut his f*cking mouth.
    1
  2610. "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
  2611. 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
  2612.  @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
  2613. Paul Schubert Exactly
    1
  2614. What is wrong with your space bar?
    1
  2615. Dat is natuurlijk een slecht argument om maar door te puffen met benzine of diesel. Praktisch alle auto’s worden de komende jaren elektrisch, dus politieauto’s ook. De meeste elektrische auto’s maken trouwens een kunstmatig waarschuwingsgeluid bij lagere snelheden, dus dat probleem is al opgelost.
    1
  2616. ​ @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
  2617. 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
  2618. Lol they are clearly not.
    1
  2619.  @Lewis1995  Too inefficient and complex.
    1
  2620. Sure, super capacitors charge really fast and have a very high power density. The problem is that they have a much lower energy density than a battery.
    1
  2621. But they still are more environmentally friendly than diesel or gasoline cars.
    1
  2622.  @liftedj7544  "that's just a fact at this moment' Haha proof it
    1
  2623. But first we need to replace the current enormous amounts of grey hydrogen that are required on a daily basis for fertiliser, glass and metal alloy production. Hydrogen has been an industrial feed stock for decades and there is no alternative for that.
    1
  2624.  @NathanBullard-i9k  $100 K?!
    1
  2625. succes ermee 😂
    1
  2626. Peter Wieringa Toename van energieverbruik als gevolg van gewichtstoename is verwaarloosbaar. Een EV is alsnog vele malen efficiënter.
    1
  2627. Not at all. Because of the terribly low efficiency CO2 emissions of making hydrogen are far higher. Also, hydrogen cars are barely lighter. It makes absolutely zero sense.
    1
  2628.  @sticki3000  Wrong. Low efficiency means it will be a lot more difficult to be CO2 neutral. In order to power the same number of vehicles you need three times the amount of electric energy which equals three times more solar panels, wind turbines, power stations. And thus it will also considerably slow down the energy transition.
    1
  2629.  @sticki3000  If hydrogen is applied in vehicles it will be far harder to reach CO2 neutrality compared to battery electric. There will be A LOT of green hydrogen required to make steel and fertilizer production sustainable. Possibly we will need hydrogen for synthetic aviation fuels too. Using it for vehicles is a massive waste.
    1
  2630. @ Sure, but a whole lot easier than going the hydrogen route.
    1
  2631. Lol you have no clue. EVs and their batteries easily last 10 years.
    1
  2632. @RandomShart Heating with hydrogen is dumb because it is way too inefficient. Heat-pumps are the only sensible solution.
    1
  2633.  @Gordanovich02  Yeah nice anecdote.. If they spend that much on electricity, they would spend multiple times of that amount on hydrogen.
    1
  2634. If hydrogen was a great solution this could well be combined with AI. These things have nothing to do with eachother.
    1
  2635.  @nigelsview  Of course the Tesla has. But you are claiming that hydrogen was killed of ‘because it cannot be part of AI technology’ which is obviously not the case.
    1
  2636.  @nigelsview  A hydrogen car literally is an electric car with some additional components like fuel tanks and a fuel cell.
    1
  2637. for regen settings
    1
  2638. About just as bad. Even worse for human health.
    1
  2639. In the meantime Tesla and BYD are doing great… just because legacy automakers fail to make a profit on EVs does not mean ‘the market is imploding’.
    1
  2640. You are correct. Hydrogen makes zero sense for road transportation.
    1
  2641. Complete onzin. Accu‘s verslijten allang niet meer gedurende de levensduur van de auto.
    1
  2642. Waterstof is niet de opvolger van accu’s.
    1
  2643.  @HienLe-zc6hu  exactly sir.
    1
  2644. But you don’t have to burn it.
    1
  2645. Erneuerbare Kraftstoffen sind nur ein Traum.
    1
  2646. Much greener than burning fossil fuels
    1
  2647.  @ram4nd  Yup. Still a lot greener.
    1
  2648.  @ram4nd  Search for: The Underestimated Potential of Battery Electric Vehicles to Reduce Emissions
    1
  2649.  @ram4nd  The numbers are solid and backed by other research. Also natural gas doesn't make it much better for combustion engines. Heavy machinery with batteries already exist, it is not that much of a problem as you might think. By the way, we were talking about cars. Also: hydrogen is far too inefficient.
    1
  2650.  @ram4nd  They do exist, look it up. Petrol and natural gas CO2 emissions are a simple fact and can easily be compared to emissions caused by EVs. And guess what, you can also charge EVs with nuclear energy and you would only need 1/3rd of the amount of energy.
    1
  2651.  @ram4nd  Again, EV battery production is not too polluting. Their production emissions are compensated for within a few years of driving. Current generation of batteries easily last 10 to 15 years. That batteries are not an option in certain applications yet has nothing to do with its production emissions.
    1
  2652.  @ram4nd  I do. It has no effect on the outcome. I repeat: plenty of data that supports this. There has already been done tons of research on life cycle analysis of lithium ion batteries.
    1
  2653.  @ram4nd  The following report covers all your concerns. 'Lithium-Ion Vehicle Battery Production Status 2019 on Energy Use, CO 2 Emissions, Use of Metals, Products Environmental Footprint, and Recycling'.
    1
  2654. Wat mij betreft moet je 100 euro voor een kilo vlees betalen.
    1
  2655. Wat een onzin. Benzine en diesel komen nooit meer terug. Over een paar jaar is het einde verhaal.
    1
  2656. Check the current natural gas price.
    1
  2657. Nope. Burning hydrogen in an ICE is even more inefficient than fuel cell use.
    1
  2658.  @j.markkrzystofiak9907  It's the emissions of the insane amounts of electricity required. Electricity will not be zero emissions for many decades to come, so we have to be careful using it - in stead of wasting it on hydrogen production. Efficiency is what counts to get emissions down.
    1
  2659. Oh well it probably won’t cause even more health problems than the meat and dairy industry already did over the past century.
    1
  2660. Klopt, maar de manier waarop de meeste mensen een camper gebruiken maakt het prima mogelijk om een volledig elektrisch voertuig te kiezen.
    1
  2661.  @zakzwijn8410  Nee, die bedoel ik niet eens. Het scenario dat jij schetst is niet toepasbaar op 99% van alle camperbezitters, niet alleen de ‘bejaardenboxen’. Je kunt prima een paar dagen off grid zijn met een bescheiden bus met 75 L tank en een 2 kWh lithium accu. En dat zou dus ook prima met een elektrische bus kunnen. En al helemaal binnen Europa.
    1
  2662.  @zakzwijn8410  Interessant is het zeker. De nieuwe elektrische Sprinter vind ik ook veel belovend overigens. Het grootste probleem blijft gewicht. Maar dat zou eventueel op te lossen zijn met een C1-rijbewijs. En dan het hele dak vol zonnepanelen. Ecarus is ook erg leuk ja, maar ik heb geen idee wat de status is.
    1
  2663. Patsy Hetzel Liquid hydrogen cryogenic storage is also very energy intense and does not improve efficiency at all. Hydrogen’s very low volumetric energy density is one of the biggest problems that waste so much energy along the way.
    1
  2664. It’s not and hydrogen cars require platinum, lithium, nickel and cobalt too.
    1
  2665. Nope. Hydrogen is always inefficient. No matter the scale.
    1
  2666. Nice!
    1
  2667.  @gustavmeyrink_2.0  THIS
    1
  2668. The batteries do not die.
    1
  2669.  @MallocFree90  Nope. Current generation EV batteries will outlast the rest of the vehicle.
    1
  2670.  @MallocFree90  Dude if you search a little better on the internet you will find out it mainly concerns early generation EVs.
    1
  2671.  @MallocFree90  All Model 3's are still under warranty and are not known for battery problems. It's just a rare case.
    1
  2672.  @Apis4  You need to get your numbers straight. There is a factor 3 difference in efficiency caused by laws of physics. Reducing this to a factor 2 is barely possible. You don't need a 1000 mile range anywhere on earth. EVs are very versatile because electricity is practically everywhere you go. Installing rapid chargers is far more simple than developing a hydrogen ecosystem.
    1
  2673.  @Apis4  Of course I am saying that. Nobody needs a range of 1000 miles in a passenger car, even in Australia. If it is not about the numbers or the efficiency, why not stick to petrol and diesel anyway? Hydrogen for passenger cars is dead and it will remain this way forever. Battery tech is already on par with HFC (Tesla Model S Long Range) and will soon be past that point. Hydrogen is simply a waaay to complicated way of storing energy and will soon have zero benefits because of battery development.
    1
  2674. ​ @Apis4 ​I am only saying hydrogen fuel cell cars make no sense in 2020 en definitely not in the future because batteries are simply making HFC obsolete. It's simple as that.
    1
  2675. @scaniav8987 gewoon nergens
    1
  2676. @ zo werkt het niet, maar dat weet je zelf ook wel.
    1
  2677. @ 😂
    1
  2678.  @m00nkinftw  Dat zal best, maar dat betekent niet dat het maar ten kosten van anderen moet gaan.
    1
  2679. Yes, EVs are a whole lot less polluting indeed.
    1
  2680. Nikola motors use electric motors.
    1
  2681. Seb C exactly
    1
  2682. Alle wegverkeer wordt gewoon elektrisch. Synthetische brandstof voor lange afstands luchtverkeer en mogelijk scheepvaart. Er wordt geen ‘waarheid’ achtergehouden, dit is gewoon algemeen bekend.
    1
  2683. Not really. Charging will happen mainly during the night when demand is low.
    1
  2684. Of course this is important. But even more important is to get emissions down as fast as possible.
    1
  2685.  @bryantanderson430  Fluctuations in some car maker’s production doesn’t mean EVs ‘go bye bye’…
    1
  2686. EVs are doing fine in Scandinavia.
    1
  2687.  @mydogsbutler  EVs are doing fine in winter on long distance drives. No problem at all.
    1
  2688.  @mydogsbutler  I was referring to very cold weather in Northern Norway. Proper EVs like Tesla, MB, Hyundai and several Chinese brands are doing fine and do not suffer from ‘halving range’ because of proper battery temperature management systems.
    1
  2689. @ Of course they lose range (any vehicle does). Just not even close to ‘half’.
    1
  2690. De indirecte kosten van fossiele brandstoffen (ja ook gas) zullen enorm hoog zijn. Duurzame energie is de enige toekomstbestendige oplossing. En nee, gas is niet schoon. Landen zoals Duitsland zijn gewend op olie te stoken, dit is nog veruilender dan aardgas. De keuze om aardgas te stimuleren is gewoon emotiepolitiek maar geen echte oplossing.
    1
  2691. Lol how many kWh per day do you consume then?
    1
  2692. And will always remain so.
    1
  2693.  @williammeek4078  exactly
    1
  2694. Yeah they went way down.
    1
  2695. Een waterstofauto is alleen z'n leven lang super inefficiënt. Een accu kost om te maken misschien wat meer CO2, maar de betreffende auto is wel drie maal zo efficiënt (en goedkoop) in gebruik.
    1
  2696. Even if the electricity comes from fossil fuels for a large part using heat pumps still causes less CO2.
    1
  2697. 😂😂😂 wappie
    1
  2698. There are many good reasons to abandon it.
    1
  2699.  @paperhouse6282  Yup
    1
  2700. Of course not. Ever heard of DC charging? Hydrogen is terribly inefficient.
    1
  2701. You can get great used EVs for 15 - 20k.
    1
  2702.  @Gaspardini  it’s not. These are very normal prices for any vehicle of a few years old. This was unimaginable 2 years ago.
    1
  2703.  @Gaspardini  In the Netherlands. Second hand EV cars do not require a lot of maintenance because it doesn’t have an engine. Batteries are maintenance free. And yes, you do in fact see a lot of EVs in several European countries.
    1
  2704. "the real TRUTH" 😂
    1
  2705.  @miguellopez3392  Yup. Methane is much easier to handle. Hydrogen for rockets would require cryogenic storage and the material embrittlement that comes with it is neither very handy with reusable rockets.
    1
  2706.  @johnbash-on-ger Oh definitely!
    1
  2707.  @grogery1570  Yes, but the energy produced from such turbines is also miniscule. Then the question remains: does that small amount of energy come from extra fuel burned in the vehicles to maintain their speed, or is it harvested waste energy?
    1
  2708. Valt mee hoor, er zijn juist de afgelopen jaren veel minder dure EV’s op de markt gekomen en tweedehands EV’s zijn enorm veel goedkoper geworden.
    1
  2709. 5 to 7 years is nothing. Even if it takes 2 decades it is still better than hydrogen.
    1
  2710. Well said
    1
  2711. Excellent argument..
    1
  2712. Ok wappie
    1
  2713. Veehouders niet hoor.
    1
  2714.  @Governmenttruth  Precies.
    1
  2715. Not efficient enough, especially for vehicles.
    1
  2716.  @righthoekstra  In case of stationary storage it is about 50%. In case of vehicles max 30%.
    1
  2717. Exactly. Way too many people still do not realise this unfortunately.
    1
  2718.  @perietveld6882  Er wordt hard gewerkt aan het uitbreiden van ons elektriciteitsnet. Het laden van elektrische auto's heeft daar overigens niet zo veel invloed op omdat ze geladen kunnen worden op momenten dat er weinig vraag is.
    1
  2719.  @BarnOwl61  Kan prima met openbare laadpalen. Dit soort systemen bestaan al jaren. Koken doe je overigens op gezette tijden, het opladen van de auto kan de hele nacht nog.
    1
  2720.  @BarnOwl61  Het laadnetwerk wordt elke dag uitgebreid. Laden doe je als je ligt te maffen of op je werk zit.
    1
  2721. Horribly inefficient. Hydrogen for vehicles is plain dumb.
    1
  2722.  @Quantum-Bullet  There is nowhere near enough surplus to make enough hydrogen. Especially if you realise that all the future battery electric vehicles (cars, trucks and busses) will be stealing that surplus away when charging at night before hydrogen factories would get the change to use it.
    1
  2723. No it is just the best way ever to spend oil money.
    1
  2724. “Hydrogen fuel factories generate their own electricity using hydrogen” lol what?! 😂😂
    1
  2725. Battery swapping is not necessary at all.
    1
  2726. It is not ignored. Just go read some research reports about life cycle emissions and you will find out battery electric vehicles are always the best option.
    1
  2727. Exactly!
    1
  2728.  @melissarainchild Onjuist. Is al vaak aangetoond.
    1
  2729.  @roelsoetewey9883 Precies
    1
  2730. Hé weer een wappie
    1
  2731. Niet relevant. De milieuzone gaat om lokale luchtkwaliteit.
    1
  2732. Room is not the problem. Payload capacity is. The battery is just off the shelf from the Mustang.
    1
  2733.  @ruudvanderzanden8013  Hé een wappie
    1
  2734. THIS
    1
  2735. Don’t think so. The tanks are heavy. Also, the one and only advantage of fuel cell cars is their refueling time. If you are already thinking about swappable energy containers why not go for batteries in the first place?
    1
  2736. I don't get where you got that number. Hydrogen is currently about €10 ($11) per kg at refilling stations in Germany. Also: hydrogen will never become cheaper than electricity as you need the latter to produce the first.
    1
  2737.  @milanswoboda5457  Exactly.
    1
  2738. Samuel Boyle I looked it up. The price is $11 dollars at the pump.
    1
  2739.  @samuelboyle8627  It's still speculation. Information from the H2V Energies website: "Supplies of the up to 99.8% pure compressed hydrogen will start in 2022 at prices of CAD 3.50 (USD 2.68/EUR 2.41) per kg. Taxes, deployment and delivery charges will be estimated on top of that price." So like Milan said, that price is without downstream costs and doesn't even exist currently - let alone in Germany.
    1
  2740. Samuel Boyle It’s not really the price that concerns me but the low efficiency that makes hydrogen a very worrisome idea when applied to vehicles.
    1
  2741. Samuel Boyle 1 KG of hydrogen is about 33 kWh. So a Mirai consumes twice the amount of energy while driving compared to a Tesla. The other problems are production, storage and transportation which are very inefficient as well. A battery electric car is therefore about 3 times as efficient. Also: you can’t make hydrogen from just water, you need energy. Lots of energy. Energy that could have been used to drive 3 times as much in a Tesla...
    1
  2742. Samuel Boyle I am not interested in theoretical costs. The problem is lack of efficiency. A fuel cell electric vehicle consumes three times the amount of energy per driven distance. This will never improve significantly due to simple laws of physics. Driving on hydrogen is an utter waste of energy and should therefore not be encouraged. Just like the sales of incandescent light bulbs are banned in Europe.
    1
  2743. CO2 kun je niet filteren alleen afvangen. En juist dat afvangen kost veel energie.
    1
  2744. Would still produce far too much CO2. Not a future proof solution at all.
    1
  2745. What does it do? Well it makes a much better country.
    1
  2746. Lol if they stick to combustion engines the company will be bankrupt soon.
    1
  2747. It’s not more carbon neutral at all. An EV pays for its production emissions within a few years.
    1
  2748. You don’t care about emissions?
    1
  2749.  @saneman8147  Producing far less CO2 than burning gasoline.
    1
  2750. Mr. Hamster De koeien zouden er helemaal niet zijn als de veehouderij niet bestond.
    1
  2751. Yes, the future is bright.
    1
  2752. You forgot that you need A LOT of solar energy.
    1
  2753. Quick answer: nope
    1
  2754. And you think that fuel cells simply come falling from the sky? Compressed air is hideously inefficient by the way. Even worse than hydrogen.
    1
  2755. Sure, but animal agriculture is also polluting. Therefore is completely justified to make changes.
    1
  2756.  @vieiradosreismariadelurdes9105  Again, animal agriculture does not deserve subsidies (and does not feed me).
    1
  2757.  @vieiradosreismariadelurdes9105  I am not claiming to be. That is why governments are sometimes needed to correct harmful activities.
    1
  2758. It’s just physics. It will never work at an acceptable level.
    1
  2759.  @SovietRosco  It's highly inefficient to first generate electricity, then convert it to hydrogen, then compress it to hundreds of bar, then transport it, then put in in a car, and eventually convert it back to electricity. It will never become considerably less inefficient.
    1
  2760.  @SovietRosco  Well there are many industries requiring vast amounts of renewable hydrogen as a feedstock. I don't know about profitability but that is where the focus should be at least. Not at road vehicles.
    1
  2761.  @SovietRosco  Production by electrolysis is fine, but we should save the hydrogen produced for applications where there is no alternative.
    1
  2762.  @SovietRosco  like I said, industrial processes that require hydrogen as a feedstock. For example fertilizer and steel alloy production.
    1
  2763.  @kennordsfan1494  That doesn't mean I am incorrect. On average less than 10% is used for petrochemical products. That a new plant wants to crank that up to 60% that is totally fine. What is your problem?
    1
  2764. Not at all.
    1
  2765.  @les318  That is a common misconception. On average we need less than 10 kWh a day to drive. You can easily charge that overnight or at work on low power chargers. What about occupied chargers? Well you just wait a bit or drive to another. They will be everywhere.
    1
  2766.  @les318  "People do not want trickle charging they want full rate charging" That's just wrong. Over night charging does not have to be fast like I explained already.
    1
  2767.  @les318  That is your choice. We were talking about average EV charging habits. That is what counts when looking at grid capacity.
    1
  2768.  @les318  Of course there is such a thing as average charging behaviour. There will always be an average number of EVs charging at a certain time of the day. That's crucial for load balancing on the grid. You just keep searching for excuses.
    1
  2769. No.
    1
  2770. I agree. And apart from that: we first need enormous amounts of renewable hydrogen to replace the current grey hydrogen that is used as feed stock for the chemical industry (i.e. fertiliser and steel). They do not have an alternative.
    1
  2771. It’s full of anecdotes..
    1
  2772.  @xXAlmdudlerXx  Anything that can charge at DC current is fast charging. For most cars this is between 50 and 100 kW. This results in 30-40 minute charge to 80% which is fine.
    1
  2773.  @xXAlmdudlerXx  efuels is EVEN WORSE than hydrogen when it comes to efficiency.
    1
  2774.  @xXAlmdudlerXx  Electricity always involves emissions. Even renewable energy. There is zero reasons to choose intrinsically inefficient solutions like efuels.
    1
  2775. It’s not a scam and of course it is not over.
    1
  2776.  @Thereisariver-y3b  You forgot about the bromance between Trump and Musk?
    1
  2777. Have you ever driven one?
    1
  2778. Je kunt gewoon kiezen wat je eet. Wie betaalt, bepaalt.
    1
  2779.  @lucasvanderheijden2537  Groente zijn heel goedkoop ten opzichte van vlees en zuivel.
    1
  2780.  @lucasvanderheijden2537  Ik weet niet waar jij je groente haalt, maar groente zijn inderdaad goedkoop. In Duitsland misschien nog wat goedkoper maar dan heb je het wel een beetje gehad qua Europese landen.
    1
  2781. The video is correct because both hydrogen cars and EVs start with electricity.
    1
  2782. Yes, methane leakage is really bad. But worse than coal? What is your source?
    1
  2783. Niet alles kan perfect zijn. De voordelen wegen gelukkig gigantisch op tegen de nadelen.
    1
  2784. reported for spam
    1
  2785.  @georgesealy4706  It will be fine. It's all about the average numbers. Californians drive about 15k miles per year so that is 40 miles per day. This is only 12 kWh per day of energy and this can easily be charged during the night at a very low charging rate.
    1
  2786. Why?
    1
  2787.  @mattrobinson5254  If hydrogen is used it will be used for industrial applications.
    1
  2788.  @mattrobinson5254  Agreed.
    1
  2789.  @alexbhagwan3082  I am sure you will eventually enjoy all the positive sides of driving electric vehicles.
    1
  2790. Envy West Neehoor, batterijen zijn veel beter. Bovendien kun je auto’s intelligent opladen als het aanbod hoog is.
    1
  2791. All incorrect. Range anxiety hasn’t been an issue anymore for most people as modern EVs easily do 400 km. You can buy decent used EVs for €15k. And yes, EVs are actually a lot greener than diesel or petrol cars. And last but not least: hydrogen is a terrible solution for passenger cars and will always remain so.
    1
  2792. Es wird nie genug HVO sein für alle dieselfahrzeugen. Deswegen soll auch für Wohnmobile Elektroantrieb der standard werden.
    1
  2793.  @inaxycvgtgb9339  Stimmt, es wird für großere Wohnmobile noch lange dauern bevor Elektroantrieb sinn macht. Aber, Elektroautos sind immer weniger Umweltschädlich als verbrenner, sogar wenn nicht erneuerbare Energie genutzt wird - auch wenn die Batterieherstellungsemissionen mitgenommen werden.
    1
  2794.  @inaxycvgtgb9339  Bitte lesen sie die zahlreiche Forschungsberichte die es in 2024 schon gibt. Vor allem wenn mann die gesamte Lebenzyklus berücksichtigtet gewinnt der Elektroauto locker.
    1
  2795. Ja. Er bestaat geen serieus alternatief en dat zal er ook niet komen.
    1
  2796.  @jan11012  Kan prima hoor. Het midden- en hoogspanningsnet wordt momenteel verzwaard. Dat is hoe dan ook nodig. Snelladen is helemaal niet nodig op dagelijkse basis. Een gemiddelde EV verbruikt maar 10 kWh per dag.
    1
  2797. Hoezo? Het is de hoogste tijd dat het afgelopen is met de veehouderij.
    1
  2798. Of course, but in order to get enough used hybrid and electric cars on the market, they first have to be bought new. In big numbers. Really big.
    1
  2799. 👍🏻
    1
  2800.  @thehypernator5851  Je moet gewoon een elektrische auto met een accu kopen. Dan rij je voor 4 a 5 cent per kilometer. Die kun je overigens ook op marktplaats vinden.
    1
  2801. Plenty of data available. Take a look at the report ‘The Underestimated Potential of Battery Electric Vehicles to Reduce Emissions’ by Auke Hoekstra.
    1
  2802.  @dogdooish  Pretty much everywhere. It is in salt.
    1
  2803.  @dogdooish  All salt is sea salt. And I was not talking about seawater. Most lithium comes from brine lakes and solid rock.
    1
  2804. And that is exactly what they explained in the video...
    1
  2805. Maar wel veel duurder per kilometer en in onderhoud.
    1
  2806. Nobody is mentioning it because it is not true. You are misinformed. Electric driving is always the cleanest option.
    1
  2807.  @sannajansens4848  Zo is het.
    1
  2808.  @vellaanna-louisebarto1607  Nee.
    1
  2809. ​@windson7 Lol transportation accounts for 28% of the total greenhouse gas emissions. Industry 22%. Methane and LPG are barely any better than gasoline and diesel.
    1
  2810. Gas price has been low for over a year…
    1
  2811. @ why didn’t you check them yourself?
    1
  2812. Because?
    1
  2813. Very inefficient
    1
  2814.  @ericdew2021  Good point, might be possible.
    1
  2815. One does not have to wonder. Driving on electricity is always cleaner.
    1
  2816.  @richards6854  It is terribly inefficient.
    1
  2817.  @richards6854  You cannot compare EV batteries to phone batteries at all. Due to sophisticated thermal management EV batteries easily last 10+ years. Also: hydrogen is a terribly cumbersome solution to lack of grid capacity.
    1
  2818. What was the research question?
    1
  2819. So tell me, what is the problem with lithium mining? And you think that the lithium, cobalt, nickel and platinum for hydrogen cars come falling from the skies? And no, solar panels on top of a gas station are BY FAR not enough to create any considerable amount of hydrogen.
    1
  2820.  @duarteolival4177  Again, there IS lithium involved in hydrogen cars as they have lithium-ion batteries on board. And no, the Icelandic solar panels do not solve the hydrogen production problem. It’s the electrolysis that is intrinsically inefficient.
    1
  2821.  @duarteolival4177  Electrolysis can only be marginally improved and then there remain massive losses in compression, transport and conversion in the fuel cell.
    1
  2822.  @duarteolival4177  Sure, but only marginally. Simple laws of physics will prevent any substantial improvement of efficiency. That’s the whole problem.
    1
  2823. The water is not gone. Just cones back as water vapor.
    1
  2824. Common misconception. Even on mainly non renewable energy it is cleaner than diesel.
    1
  2825. Less inefficient*
    1
  2826. Smart charging systems will distribute power evenly through the day and night. Average daily EV consumption is less than 10 kWh so over night charging can be done very slow. 12 kW is a lot for home charging by the way.
    1
  2827. Production of fuel cells was not taken into consideration either.
    1
  2828. These batteries will easily pay back for itself within that period.
    1
  2829. not in the slightest
    1
  2830.  @EngineeringMindset  First of all, thanks a lot for your reply! Okay, so the two wires connected to the primary coil as shown at 1:56 consist of 1 phase and 1 ground (the latter not going back to the power station)?
    1
  2831.  @GH-oi2jf  Thanks for your explanation!
    1
  2832.  @EngineeringMindset  Thanks! Will take a look.
    1
  2833. The battery will easily last 15 years.
    1
  2834. selim t haha misschien blijft het toegestaan om een clubje op te richten zodat je ergens in een weiland met een paar andere enthousiastelingen eens in de zoveel tijd gezamelijk naar het geluid van een verbrandingsmotor kan luisteren en aan de uitlaat ruiken.
    1
  2835. Your theory does not solve the efficiency problem.
    1
  2836.  @reidunolsen1531  Not at all. It's is literally the best thing that Norway could do. Use the wealth from fossil fuels to build a more sustainable country. And now, more than a decade later, countless of other countries are doing the same. The result? Less oil is being burnt every day.
    1
  2837. What are you talking about? A self charging car?
    1
  2838. Correct. Among the biggest proponents of hydrogen are oil companies.
    1
  2839. ​ @chrishar110  Pretty good, but that would only be enough for a tiny part of the total hydrogen demand. Also: in the future we will have far fewer oil rigs in the world.
    1
  2840.  @chrishar110  I see, sorry. Yes, that sounds likely!
    1
  2841. Sure but it cannot replace the need for sustainable transport.
    1
  2842. Not at all necessary.
    1
  2843. You don’t think lowering CO2 emissions should be mandatory?
    1
  2844.  @timpalmer-logstolumber1999  3. Batteries are designing to withstand a lot of impact. Also, this is a repair cost. Not maintenance. Maintenance is almost zero. 4. Exactly, and exactly this is happening all over the world. 5. As we know now these events were mainly caused by lack of experience of the drivers. 6. Some early generation EVs may have had problems with this. Not an issue anymore due to sophisticated thermal management systems. 7. Sure, but 10.000 miles is obviously far off. 8. Correct. Many countries have already proven this is all possible. 9. Not debatable. AC consumes extra energy, whether it comes from a battery or from a tank of gas. 11. Technically correct. In real life no problem. 14. Could be something that has to be improved long term. More than worth it. But then again: vehicles have always been getting heavier. 15. Correct, but data and research shows that EVs burn far less often. Encouraging EVs is totally justified because every EV saves a lot of CO2 from being emitted. There is no time to lose.
    1
  2845.  @timpalmer-logstolumber1999  Unfortunately this Mguy dude is a total idiot. He makes money through is channel simply because spreading completely sensationalised and simply incorrect information about EVs attracts a lot of views.
    1
  2846. LFP has no cobalt.
    1
  2847.  @lorenbeaulieu2896  Lithium iron phosphate…… aka LiFePO4
    1
  2848.  @alpha_pixel_  Not worth it. With the current state of battery tech nobody would ever use the hydrogen part.
    1
  2849.  @alpha_pixel_  Hydrogen will never make sense for vehicles.
    1
  2850.  @alpha_pixel_  That doesn't say anything. It's just simple physics. Hydrogen can never catch up with batteries regarding efficiency.
    1
  2851. wappie
    1
  2852. They are a lot better, even if mainly fossil electricity is used to charge them. Just simple physics. Electric vehicles are far more efficient.
    1
  2853.  @xavierdarche4822  Dank. Er is gelukkig één iemand hier die het wel begrijpt. Het niveau van de andere comments is weer erg ver te zoeken - zoals gebruikelijk bij dit onderwerp.
    1
  2854.  @thebowlingchannelnetwork5182  droom lekker verder
    1
  2855. Far higher emissions than an EV and there is no battery landfill problem.
    1
  2856. Gelukkig heeft een groot deel van het land hier veel baat bij.
    1
  2857. It’s a matter of smart charging systems and stationary batteries.
    1
  2858.  @VTRAQUEVNVMPLVSVLTRA  Of course they do. But more above ground infrastructure means more cutting up landscapes in general.
    1
  2859.  @AmurTiger  Ok, interesting. Are there any examples in the world where freight rail has significantly reduced truck use?
    1
  2860.  @racevoltGamerthemecedesguy  no it cannot
    1
  2861.  @racevoltGamerthemecedesguy  Tell me how that engine is called.
    1
  2862.  @tannhaeuserx464  exactly
    1
  2863. @ I live in Europe and can tell you that it has much better rail infrastrucute than many other places on earth.
    1
  2864. Sie glauben Windräder auf See ist etwas neues?! Wir wissen einfach genau wie lange die halten weil es die schon so lange gibt!
    1
  2865. Precies!
    1
  2866.  @kerngezond6953 precies!
    1
  2867.  @bicyclexx7  yeah sure 😂
    1
  2868.  @amonroe-ie9mz  nope
    1
  2869.  @ETERNAL4U-i8m  A famous myth
    1
  2870. Exactly Claire
    1
  2871. 99% of all hydrogen is produced from natural gas.
    1
  2872. Leg uit waarom dat van toepassing is op deze video.
    1
  2873.  @mikedehollander6848  Dat is hier niet het geval. Waterstof is simpelweg een inferieure technologie en ook veel kostbaarder. Iedereen (behalve deze pompstationhouder) is er dus bij gebaad om waterstof uit te sluiten.
    1
  2874. That does not prove anything.
    1
  2875. Exactly lol.
    1
  2876. so what? The point is the emissions are FAR lower.
    1
  2877. Nope. Hydrogen is too inefficient.
    1
  2878.  @TheMrbc74  Only slightly. Hydrogen car efficiency will never get anywhere near that of an EV due to laws of physics. Electrons are also plentiful.
    1
  2879.  @TheMrbc74  There is no shortage of materials at all. Fuel cells require materials like platinum to make. Batteries will be recycled obviously.
    1
  2880.  @vonabod4259  Battery technology is far easier to implement anywhere in the world than hydrogen.
    1
  2881. De accu's worden vanzelf groter de komende jaren.
    1
  2882.  @robbin00  Maak je daar maar geen zorgen over. Het gewicht neemt niet evenredig aan de actieradius toe.
    1
  2883. You do realize we have already reached price parity right?
    1
  2884. Well if you want that you can convert an old one to electric yourself. Obviously in this modern age it would be impossible to produce a vehicle like that because of safety and comfort standards.
    1
  2885.  @Bimmer_i4_M50 genau 😂
    1
  2886. Wronggggg
    1
  2887. Sure, but plenty of other European countries are doing the same. You have to look at the bigger picture.
    1
  2888.  @unionofconcernedpolarbears1006  Well there is an enormous amount of energy hitting our planet every second (practically infinite), but the usable availability is still very little due to the limited number of solar panels (which makes it scarce).
    1
  2889.  @unionofconcernedpolarbears1006  Not at all. We are talking many decades here.
    1
  2890.  @unionofconcernedpolarbears1006  Then what? All energy = renewable?
    1
  2891. Tip: zoek even het verschil op tussen 'C02' en stikstof.
    1
  2892. Weight is not a big factor when it comes to range and no, a smaller electric motor would not give it more range.
    1
  2893. ja, logisch toch. maar daarna rijd je een stuk schoner.
    1
  2894. Not relevant. CO2 emissions are simply too high. The end of combustion engines will just be a matter of legislation.
    1
  2895.  @FowlorTheRooster1990  The grid will be fine as we don’t transition to EVs in one year. It’s a slow process so there is enough time to upgrade the grid.
    1
  2896.  @basszoneproduction  Vermoedelijk doel je op het hoge energieverbruik van industriële toepassingen. De industrie bestaat echter om producten te produceren die burgers nodig hebben.
    1
  2897.  @smgibv4393  Er komt net zoveel gas uit Noorwegen als uit Rusland. Beide circa 25% van onze totale behoefte.
    1
  2898. Nederland gaat helemaal niet kapot. We zouden er allemaal zeer bij gebaat zijn als de veehouderij zo snel mogelijk drastisch wordt verkleind.
    1
  2899. BUT FAR GREENER
    1
  2900. Dat boeit niet. Kolencentrales zijn veel efficiënter dan verbrandingsmotoren.
    1
  2901. Wrong. Just because hydrogen can be used for surplus storage does not mean that we should put it in cars. Just convert it back to electricity at the exact same facility when needed and then distribute through the grid. Also: A LOT of the renewable surplus will be consumed by charging EVs.
    1
  2902. For these amounts of hydrogen we would need to build three times as many solar panels and wind turbines though.
    1
  2903.  @uralmutlu4320  I don't think it is doable. Despite the fact renewables are growing quite fast, building enough turbines and solar panels for going down the hydrogen route would take insanely long and a lot of materials and investments. It would actually slow down the energy transition and set back net zero goals by decades.
    1
  2904. Dude why do you press your spacebar so often
    1
  2905. Not true. An average EV only requires 10 kWh a day.
    1
  2906.  @RobbertJoostens-mf1vn  overheid en banken
    1
  2907.  @TedAlba-v8p Sure, but infrastructure will be in place in the future. Again, combustion engines make no sense anymore soon. Methanol production is a devastating industry that we don't need more of in the world.
    1
  2908.  @TedAlba-v8p  The grid will be fine, if that is what you mean.
    1
  2909. No, it is just a fact.
    1
  2910. CNG causes almost as much CO2 as diesel.
    1
  2911. Waarom eet je die shit überhaupt
    1
  2912. all cars will be electric
    1
  2913.  @LogiForce86  Actieradius is nauwelijks groter dan de huidige generatie accu-bussen. Het grondstoffen-probleem is niet zo groot als veel mensen klakkeloos aannemen. Voor elektrolysers en brandstofcellen heb je ook zeldzamere metalen nodig en in waterstofvoertuigen zitten ook gewoon lithium-ionaccu's. Dit in combinatie met de bedroevend lage efficiëntie maakt dat rijden op waterstof een slecht plan is en zelfs een averechts effect heeft op het behalen van de klimaatdoelen.
    1
  2914. CO2. Niet met een nul.
    1
  2915. ‘It is dirt cheap because it can be made from water’ LOL you forgot the other ingredient: loads of energy
    1
  2916. overnight charging.
    1
  2917. horribly inefficient.
    1
  2918. Norway has been using EVs for over a decade without any problems. EVs are doing fine in winter.
    1
  2919. Would require three times as many solar panels compared to a simple EV.
    1
  2920. No matter how you spin it, all cars will have to be electric anyway.
    1
  2921. Still far and far less polluting than fossil alternatives.
    1
  2922.  @cheech8257  Es gibt nur 1 Testanlage von nur 2 MW. Es produziert jetzt keinen Strom.
    1
  2923.  @cheech8257  Das es noch immer sehr, sehr lange dauern wird.
    1
  2924.  @cheech8257  Falsch.
    1
  2925. Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles require platinum, lithium, cobalt and nickel too and then there all the other matierals required for building 3 times the number of wind turbines and solar panels required. And just because we can make some hydrogen with excess energy doesn't mean we should put it in trucks and it won't be enough anyway.
    1
  2926. with horrible technology..
    1
  2927. Battery replacement will turn out to be very rare.
    1
  2928. Wrong
    1
  2929. Did you watch the video?
    1
  2930.  @farquadshmoogle9120  Batteries are mentioned.
    1
  2931.  @farquadshmoogle9120  That is exactly what is happening
    1
  2932. A million years?! You do realize livestock numbers have increased dramatically since the 20th century?
    1
  2933. Ja dat is ook het hele idee van een overheid lol.
    1
  2934. 20k is easily doable soon. Especially used.
    1
  2935.  @markdc1145  Oh yes they are. Haven’t you heard of the recent EV price war?
    1
  2936. Just enjoy your diesel, but don’t use invalid arguments.
    1
  2937. Just use them to charge electric cars.
    1
  2938.  @mtjoeng  Yeah and that is much easier than creating hydrogen infrastructure. Improving the grid is a natural process that has always been going on and we need it for other applications as well like heating and cooling of buildings.
    1
  2939. Hybrids were cool 20 years ago. Fully electric is the only sensible thing to do now.
    1
  2940. It's a famous myth. That comparison only concerns sulfur emissions - NOT CO2 and all the other shit that leaves the exhaust pipes.
    1
  2941. Emissions from an electric vehicle are always lower, even on non renewable electricity.
    1
  2942.  @dimitartodorov1352  Plenty of research available that proves this. And yes, batteries are recyclable.
    1
  2943.  @dimitartodorov1352  Just google: life cycle emissions electric car. These calculations are so simple you can check them yourself.
    1
  2944. Plenty of reasons
    1
  2945. Not really. AC only consumes about 1 kW which is nothing compared to the drivetrain consumption.
    1
  2946. Not at all. Synthetic fuels required many times more electric energy.
    1
  2947.  @VintageCars999  Still not anywhere close to battery electric and will never be.
    1
  2948.  @VintageCars999  You are claiming that ‘synthetic fuels will be better’ which they are obviously not. Large scale investment in synth fuels would be an insane waste of money, resources and energy. EVs are the only way forward.
    1
  2949.  @VintageCars999  For occasional use of classic cars it seems acceptable. For broad general adoption absolutely not because the CO2 emissions caused by the enormous amounts of electricity required would be insane. A car on synth fuel consumes about 5 to 6 times more electricity per mile.
    1
  2950.  @VintageCars999  It doesn't work that way. There won't be an abundance of renewable energy in 2030, neither in 2040. Using renewables for synthetic fuels is a horrible waste. If we all went down the synthetic fuel route we would need 6 times as many wind turbines and solar panels in the world. This would slow down the energy transition a lot which is unacceptable because of the climate emergency like you described yourself. It doensn't prove anything that Porsche and BMW like to invenst in synthetic fuels. They just want to keep selling combustion engines.
    1
  2951. ehh it actually does look pretty
    1
  2952. Ja, akkerbouwers ja.
    1
  2953. Exactly. And apart from that: EV's are ALWAYS the cleanest option, even if you use coal heavy electricity.
    1
  2954. EV is greener. Hydrogen cars also need ‘rare’ earth materials.
    1
  2955. EV batteries will easily last 15 years.
    1
  2956. Nee want het is bedroevend inefficiënt.
    1
  2957.  @GerardvanVooren  Zonnepanelen zijn praktisch gratis tegenwoordig.
    1
  2958.  @GerardvanVooren  Ik zei toch praktisch…
    1
  2959. Well at least A LOT less to go wrong
    1
  2960.  @markcozzie  sure, this is not good but exceptional
    1
  2961. Of course it is the future.
    1
  2962.  @illeatmyhat  You still need batteries to store the energy from whatever source you prefer.
    1
  2963.  @illeatmyhat  Yeah, I am mainly referring to vehicles. EV adoption is not, and won't be, an overnight event. It is a relatively slow process and the grid will grow accordingly. This might take a decade or two.
    1
  2964. It's not. Hydrogen is ultra inefficient and therefore not clean at all. A Model 3 long range can drive just as far.
    1
  2965. Not really. Hydrogen always remains inefficient.
    1
  2966. It will always remain inefficient and therefore expensive due to physics, that’s why. Airliners on hydrogen? Possibly in a far future. But they will more likely run on synthetic fuels first.
    1
  2967. Wind and solar are very complementary.
    1
  2968.  @WeebMaximus  That's not the point. Average numbers show they are complementary and that is VERY helpful already. This in combination with international grid connections and storage will be a huge chunk of the solution.
    1
  2969. Dutch
    1
  2970. That doesn't matter.
    1
  2971.  @ezralimm  Plastics make up only a tiiiny amount of crude oil products.
    1
  2972. Why do you think so?
    1
  2973. Niet waar. Openbaar laden in de straat kost zo rond de 40 cent per kWh.
    1
  2974. A generator generating what?
    1
  2975. And that has what to do with electric vehicles?
    1
  2976. What about the batteries in the hydrogen car?
    1
  2977. BNR?
    1
  2978.  @arnemaeschaelck5012  Dus omdat we nu op een vergelijkbaar rendement zitten is dat een reden om het maar zo te houden? xD
    1
  2979. 200 km with 50 kWh? That's 250 Wh per kilometer, sounds really high to me. How fast do you drive on the motorway?
    1
  2980.  @roninviking  😄
    1
  2981. Has been researched a million times. Electric vehicles are always less polluting.
    1
  2982. They do not run on the same levels of efficiency DESPITE the fact that they both are technically electric vehicles as is clearly explained in the video.
    1
  2983.  @IWontBuy-RP  Dat is heel makkelijk. Google: life cycle analysis wind energy. Succes met lezen.
    1
  2984. Ben jij nu al je huis aan het koelen?
    1
  2985. Lol so what do you propose for the future.
    1
  2986. Yup 😅
    1
  2987. Zucht. Letterlijk niemand die zich ook maar beetje in de materie heeft verdiept komt anno 2024 nog met het waterstofverhaal aankakken.
    1
  2988.  @DanBanYamYanHarishan  Jij bent degene die simpelweg doet alsof natuurkundige wetten hier niet van toepassing zijn.
    1
  2989.  @DanBanYamYanHarishan  Je kunt niet doodleuk over waterstof in verbrandingsmotoren beginnen en het vervolgens niet over rendement willen hebben. En je hebt wel een extreem vreemde definitie van een trol.
    1
  2990. In Western Europe, where freight rail is well developed, there are still insane numbers of trucks on the road.
    1
  2991.  @johnwu8764  The volumetric energy density of hydrogen is low. This can be solved by compression. Lots of compression. And this is exactly what makes it so inefficient.
    1
  2992. Fuel cells and tanks don’t exist in nature either. Making hydrogen requires a lot more of of that same power (about 3 times). Converting a gas station to hydrogen is not easy at all. The required refueling setup is massive and very expensive to build and maintain.
    1
  2993.  @daviabraga  I understand your point too, but we need to extract minerals / materials either way. Because hydrogen is so inefficient we would need to build a lot more windturbines and solar panels for example.
    1
  2994. It’s just facts.
    1
  2995. Refineries can be tuned to produce more or less of a certain product. Also, diesel will still be required for many commercial applications for a while.
    1
  2996. 1. fuel cell = electric 2. hydrogen is super inefficient and thus expensive
    1
  2997.  @IrelandVonVicious  Scale does not solve the efficiency problem. Hydrogen will always remain a lot less efficient.
    1
  2998.  @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
  2999.  @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
  3000.  @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
  3001. Hydrogen cars are, relative to EVs, VERY inefficient. That is the problem.
    1
  3002. Wrong
    1
  3003. You will always be able to charge an EV with any socket. So that is not going to work. There are many alternatives to charge for road tax.
    1
  3004. Wrong. Of course EVs have environmental impact in several ways, just like any other mass produced product. The whole point is that EVs are far less polluting than gasoline and diesel cars. Wake up.
    1
  3005. In the meantime proper EVs can cover 1000 km in less than 10 hours including charging, barely slower than using an ICE car.
    1
  3006.  @marcelgood6875 Look up Bjørn Nyland.
    1
  3007. You answered your own question sir.
    1
  3008. Aansteller
    1
  3009. Guess what, EVs and ICE are working side by side right now and have been doing so for over a decade.
    1
  3010. Not really.
    1
  3011. No you can't.
    1
  3012. Joe, you are a clever man.
    1
  3013. VW
    1
  3014. It is safe. Does not mean it is perfect.
    1
  3015.  @xraylife  Lol you are clueless
    1
  3016.  @xraylife  Not relevant. What relevant is, is the data and loads of life cycle analysis reports that prove that EVs are the least polluting option.
    1
  3017.  @xraylife  Even if that were true, which it is not, it is not relevant at all because this is an incident.
    1
  3018.  @xraylife  Nope. Again, just an incident. In the meantime millions of EVs were safely delivered all around the world and are saving millions of tons of CO2 during their lifetime.
    1
  3019.  @xraylife  Even when non renewable energy is used for charging, EVs produce less CO2. That’s why they make so much sense.
    1
  3020.  @xraylife  LOL first you are worried about electricity production causing CO2 emissions and then all of a sudden man made CO2 is not relevant anymore 😂
    1
  3021.  @RobertMartin-s2v  Sure, but it remains a 0 sum game. There is no advantage to a very light vehicle.
    1
  3022. Would still be a massive waste of money. A used EV would be a lot more capable.
    1
  3023. There is no need to ‘believe’. You can just look it up. Plenty of research proves that EVs are in fact the solution.
    1
  3024. 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
  3025. The vast majority of the car's emissions come from use. As in: burning fuel.
    1
  3026.  @acidjubatus470  There is no need to guess about this. There is a lot of life cycle emission research available online. The conclusion is clear: production and maintenance emissions are TINY compared to fuel burning emissions.
    1
  3027. There is no cobalt in electric motors.
    1
  3028. you are wrong.
    1
  3029. 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
  3030.  @williamhill1984  Yeah these vehicles are pretty laughable.
    1
  3031. EV life cycle emissions are always lower.
    1
  3032. It’s all a conspiracy!!!111eleven
    1
  3033. The website is a joke
    1
  3034. EVs produce far less CO2.
    1
  3035.  @theoaerts1951  Waarom zoveel spaties?
    1
  3036. Carbon neutral fuels are terribly inefficient so it will never be a solution suited for mass adoption.
    1
  3037.  @connclissmann6514  HVO is more or less ‘carbon neutral’.
    1
  3038. Nah battery tech already allows for electric trucks.
    1
  3039. But a lot of carbon is created when hydrogen is produced.
    1
  3040. These blackouts are not caused by EVs.
    1
  3041.  @njh4473  It's not so bad as it may sound. The vast majority of EVs charge at night at low power.
    1
  3042. Dat zie je toch
    1
  3043. Onzin. Waterstof is allang een gepasseerd station. Fatsoenlijke EV’s komen allang net zo ver als een waterstofauto voor een fractie van de prijs.
    1
  3044. And will never be.
    1
  3045. Not efficient at all.
    1
  3046. He is right. It is just a matter of basic physics.
    1
  3047.  @headcrab4090  It will always remain far less efficient.
    1
  3048. No it doesn’t. Even when using mainly non-renewable electricity driving an electric car is still a lot cleaner than burning gasoline or diesel. That is why EVs make so much sense.
    1
  3049. @hafizuddin mohd lowhim  CO2 emissions are far more important
    1
  3050.  @hafizuddinmohdlowhim8426  Only for a tiny part. Batteries will dominate.
    1
  3051.  @hafizuddinmohdlowhim8426  thanks
    1
  3052.  @robertbox5399  Yes they do. You just don't like it.
    1
  3053.  @williammeek4078  Correct, but initial purchase should be stimulated.
    1
  3054.  @richrdlewis6278  😂
    1
  3055.  @invernessity  Literally every statement you make proves that you never took the slightest effort to inform yourself. Stop embarrassing yourself.
    1
  3056.  @notyourtypicalwatchreview2563  😂
    1
  3057.  @noahheuvelmans6951  "alleen maar groenten gaan produceren dat sneller over datum is" Waar heb je het over? Sneller dan wat?
    1
  3058.  @noahheuvelmans6951  Haha wen er maar vast aan.
    1
  3059. Hydrogen is not a source of energy.
    1
  3060. It’s not logical at all.
    1
  3061. Because it is dumb. Burning hydrogen is very inefficient.
    1
  3062. Of course, but not for road vehicles. There are countless industrial applications in which fossil sourced hydrogen has been playing a vital role for decades.
    1
  3063. Nee man. Veel te inefficiënt.
    1
  3064. pietje keesje Allebei. In een cilinder is het ergst.
    1
  3065. Hydrogen cars have batteries.
    1
  3066.  @TabalugaDragon  They have lithium ion batteries for buffering the electricity. They have electric motors to spin the wheels.
    1
  3067. Source?
    1
  3068.  @garymunson2493 exactly
    1
  3069. They are not.
    1
  3070. nope
    1
  3071. Using the skin of a dead animal to sit on does not really fit in a 21st century automobile.
    1
  3072. Not ironic at all and apart from that China builds more wind and solar than any other country
    1
  3073. So where does the energy come from?!
    1
  3074.  @Jagueyes1  That is impossible. Perpetuum mobiles do not exist. Otherwise electric cars would never have to charge!
    1
  3075.  @Jagueyes1  Water is not an energy source. And theoretically you could catch the water vapor from the exhaust to use it again.
    1
  3076.  @Jagueyes1  Correct, and before that electrolysis can happen, the alternator is the energy source, and before that the engine is the energy source.. You see where this is going right?!
    1
  3077.  @Jagueyes1  It’s a scam because it would break laws of physics. If it were so easy, it would literally solve all energy problems in the world. But unfortunately it does not work that way.
    1
  3078. Lol bullshit obviously the air would be even cleaner if everybody drove an EV.
    1
  3079. Ok wappie
    1
  3080. You can do the exact same thing much more efficient and a lot less complex by using batteries.
    1
  3081.  @jurgenconings6511  Klopt helemaal hoor. De veehouderij leidt tot enorm veel dierenleed en milieuschade. Dit hoort niet thuis in de 21 eeuw.
    1
  3082.  @jarnootje  Ja ja dat verhaaltje kennen we nou wel. Het gaat er niet om HOE de boeren voor hun dieren zorgen, maar DAT de dieren gebruikt worden voor de productie van voedsel. Die dieren doen het echt niet vrijwillig als je dat soms denkt.
    1
  3083. Jarnootje! Nee hoor.
    1
  3084. bob de bouwer Dat is niet relevant. Het gaat er niet hoe het gebeurt, maar dat het gebeurt.
    1
  3085. bob de bouwer Je snapt het blijkbaar niet. Het gaat erom dat dieren worden gebruikt voor voedselproductie. Daar moet een eind aan komen.
    1
  3086. Eventually it will simply be a matter of legislation.
    1
  3087. nope
    1
  3088. Zo is het!
    1
  3089.  @Redrider1185  dank!
    1
  3090.  kainat fatima  No
    1
  3091.  kainat fatima  Protein is the worst argument to keep eating meat.
    1
  3092. lucifaeris' life and stuff You forget that hydrogen also starts with electricity.
    1
  3093.  @lucifaerislifeandstuff5181  The equation shown at 8:45 is correct. Current high end EVs (Tesla Model S) have a similar range as a Mirai or a Nexo. Filling up a hydrogen car takes 5 minutes. An average fast charge session 20 minutes. However, most EV drivers rarely fast charge because they charge during the night. So in fact you save a lot of time because you never have to drive to a fuel pump and wait for a tank to fill up.
    1
  3094.  @lucifaerislifeandstuff5181  You are just searching for arguments in favour of hydrogen. Current batteries last a long time (hundreds of thousands of kilometers), fuel cells wear out much faster. Fuel cell cars will always remain highly inefficient compared to EVs and will therefore slow down the energy transition.
    1
  3095.  @lucifaerislifeandstuff5181  A fuel cell degrades in a similar way and has a limited lifetime in hours and or kilometers. Tesla batteries are designed to last 300.000 miles or 480.000 kilometers.
    1
  3096.  @lucifaerislifeandstuff5181  Energy density by weight of hydrogen is indeed very high, but density by volume is incredibly low. Therefore lots of compression is needed which leads to horrible efficiency. EV's range is already on par with that of fuel cell vehicles and a Model S doesn't weigh much more than a Mirai. And again, the horrific energy consumption of fuel cell vehicles per kilometer is just plain stupid from a climate change perspective.
    1
  3097. Great choice.
    1
  3098. De veehouderij opdoeken a.u.b.
    1
  3099. Ermm, not electric?! NEXT
    1
  3100. A Tesla can charge at any charging station. China has a quite well developed charging network already.
    1
  3101. Inform yourself
    1
  3102.  @janbuikema8941  Ja
    1
  3103.  @joey-pn3xe  exactly.
    1
  3104. Even you will eventually own an EV.
    1
  3105. You can’t find hydrogen. You have to split water which requires energy. A LOT of energy.
    1
  3106. Because they don't... Emissions of EVs are far lower.
    1
  3107.  @johntownPSN  Wrong. Even on mainly non renewable energy EVs are cleaner than any gasoline or diesel car. Production emissions are compensated for during use.
    1
  3108.  @johntownPSN  Plenty of research has been done on the subject. Good luck reading.
    1
  3109.  @johntownPSN  LOL
    1
  3110. Nee waterstof is een dom idee want je hebt er drie keer zoveel elektriciteit voor nodig.
    1
  3111. Gibt es schon 😊
    1
  3112. ehvway Gelukkig is daar inderdaad niet voor gekozen en groeit de hoeveelheid laadplekken inmiddels gestaag.
    1
  3113.  @ehvway  1. Het net kan het prima aan hoor, alleen zal op piekmomenten het laadvermogen een beetje worden teruggeschroefd. De meeste laadpalen doen dit automatisch. Dit aangevuld met een wat netverzwaring komt dat helemaal goed. 2. Een deel van de Nederlandse elektriciteit komt inderdaad uit kolencentrales. Dus? De gemiddelde uitstoot ligt zo rond de 400 gram per kWh dus dan rijdt je nog steeds veel schoner dan met diesel of benzine. 3. Het maken van accu's kost inderdaad energie en gaat gepaard met CO2-uitstoot. Momenteel ligt dit rond de 100 kg / kWh capaciteit, wat zorgt voor 5 ton CO2 bij een accu van 50 kWh. Dat heb je dus redelijk snel gecompenseerd zodra je gaat rijden. Kobalt wordt in een klein aantal gevallen gewonnen onder twijfelachtige omstandigheden. Met de meeste kobalt is echter niets mis en bovendien zal er in de nabije toekomst helemaal geen kobalt meer in auto-accu's zitten. 4. De Chevrolet EV1 had een actieradius van maximaal 160 km en gebruikte NiMH-batterijen. Dat type batterij is tegenwoordig niks bijzonders en al helemaal geen 'geheim patent' of iets dergelijks. Oliereus Texaco had toentertijd inderdaad het patent gekocht en dat heeft waarschijnlijk er toe geleid dat de lease-contracten werden beëindigd.
    1
  3114.  @ehvway  Prijzen aan de laadpaal hangen volledig af van wat voor laadpas je hebt. Als je je daar niet in verdiept dan kan het inderdaad gebeuren dat je een keer de hoofdprijs betaalt. Duurder dan benzine en diesel zal het echter niet zo snel worden aangezien je 9 van de 10 keer thuis of in de straat voor een veel lager tarief kan laden.
    1
  3115. Gert Vanpeet Ik zeg toch niet dat je niet moet laden onderweg? Ik zeg dat je thuis wegrijdt met een goedkope volle accu. Hier hebben de meeste mensen genoeg aan voor dagelijks gebruik. En inderdaad, als je een keer naar je ouders gaat stop je effe onder zo’n geel dak.
    1
  3116. @pietkrijger Nee, ruim de helft komt van gas. Een kwart uit kolen en de rest is biomassa, wind, zon en kernenergie. Er zijn tientallen gascentrales in Nederland en slechts vier overgebleven kolencentrales.
    1
  3117.  @castonmimang  Die hardnekkige 'schijn' wordt inderdaad nog altijd door allerlei media klakkeloos de wereld in geslingerd. Dit is echter incorrect. Het gaat in werkelijkheid om circa 3 jaar.
    1
  3118.  @classicallpvault en ook hier vergeet je CO2.
    1
  3119.  @Luka_3D  Definitely
    1
  3120. But it costs a lot of energy 😂
    1
  3121. Has been tried in the past. Very complex and very costly. Hard to compete with fast charging. Fast charging already is so fast that nobody would care about battery swapping.
    1
  3122. what is your problem?
    1
  3123. You are worrying about recycling but not about CO2 being blasted into the atmosphere by fossil fuels?
    1
  3124. Even less efficient.
    1
  3125. But not efficient.
    1
  3126.  @markknoop6283  The energy required for opening car doors is of course nothing compared to the losses that occur in a ICE drivetrain. Electrolysis, compression, transportation and combustion of hydrogen is an incredibly inefficient way to use electric energy.
    1
  3127.  @markknoop6283  I know. That doesn't change anything about the low efficiency. The future is battery electric and - possibly in some rare cases - hydrogen fuel cell. Combustion engines are over.
    1
  3128.  @markknoop6283  It takes time for the world to adapt. It will be fine. Parking really is the easiest 'problem' to solve.
    1
  3129.  @markknoop6283  I know how it works. It's rare. People in cities normally don't drive to work. But hypothetically speaking, yes even that is possible.
    1
  3130.  @raplionofthejungle1515  Het gaat slechts om vlees en zuivel. Wie koopt dat nou nog?
    1
  3131. Does that matter? NO
    1
  3132. lol
    1
  3133. Waterstof voor auto's is een slecht plan.
    1
  3134. Zeg gewoon veehouders in plaats van boeren.
    1
  3135. No they did not. Big oil loves hydrogen.
    1
  3136. Cor
    1
  3137. Uitstekende plannen zijn het.
    1
  3138. He intentionally left that out.
    1
  3139. Regels zoals?
    1
  3140. He is obviously referring to preventative solutions.
    1
  3141. There is by far not enough renewable energy in the world to justify the incredibly low efficiency of hydrogen. Not now, not within the next 20 to 30 years. After that, yes we will probably use some hydrogen to store surplus renewable energy but that still does not mean we have to put it in our cars and run it to our houses. It would be a lot more efficient to convert the hydrogen back to electricity at centralised places when needed. And no, copper is not a problem.
    1
  3142. please elaborate
    1
  3143. Synthetic fuels are a terrible idea. FAR from 'brilliant'.
    1
  3144.  @leokoehne  Yeah, we are finally getting there.
    1
  3145. Not in the slightest comparable. Overall EVs are far less polluting in many ways.
    1
  3146. On board HHO generators do not improve mileage or lower emissions. It's a scam.
    1
  3147. Windwokkels 😂
    1
  3148. You are wrong and you probably know that.
    1
  3149. You regularly drive more than 200 miles without stopping?
    1
  3150. LFP is lithium ion.
    1
  3151. Well said.
    1
  3152. @Claire H Hydrogen EV batteries will last longer than 10 years. Plus: the small battery on board a hydrogen car will probably have a shorter lifespan because it cycles much more than an EV battery.
    1
  3153. @Claire H Hydrogen That has already happend. The past 10 years were a lot of fun and proved that the future for road vehicles is battery electric.
    1
  3154. But super inefficient lol
    1
  3155.  @SecureSuppliesLimited  Yeah I know that video. Still super inefficient. Basic physics.
    1
  3156.  @SecureSuppliesLimited  You forgot about production of hydrogen.
    1
  3157.  @SecureSuppliesLimited  No, just plain electricity.
    1
  3158.  @SecureSuppliesLimited  I am not denying anything, just pointing out hydrogen is a bad solution compared to battery electric.
    1
  3159. Na not really. Batteries will be so much better by that time that hydrogen is not something to consider.
    1
  3160. Rijden op waterstof is een gepasseerd station. 1. Hybride is sowieso voorbij 2. Waterstof is super inefficiënt waardoor we de klimaatdoelen überhaupt niet zouden halen. Het is trouwens niets nieuws, 30 jaar geleden werd ook al voorspeld dat we nu al lang en breed op waterstof zouden rijden. De batterij-elektrische auto is echter zoveel beter geworden door de ontwikkeling van de lithium-ionaccu dat watertof simpelweg het nakijken heeft.
    1
  3161. Do you have some numbers on these massive improvements?
    1
  3162.  @k1fizz  That sounds promising. The world will need a lot of green hydrogen in the future. It still remains inefficient to use it in vehicles but it is good news for other applications.
    1
  3163.  @k1fizz  People without home charging will use public charging, not hydrogen. Campers will be battery electric, just like trucks and vans. Shipping: yes, possibly hydrogen or synthetic fuels made with hydrogen and CO2.
    1
  3164. Of course, but that doesn’t mean we don’t need electric trucks.
    1
  3165. The oil industry uses loads of cobalt in the refining process of petrol and diesel. And yes you need plastics and lubricants to build EV's, nobody is denying this. But the total requirement for oil related materials over the lifetime of the car is FAR LESS than any petrol or diesel vehicle.
    1
  3166. You forgot about the hydrogen tanks and the fuel cell itself that require replacing after 10 years...
    1
  3167. Inderdaad. De NPO begint een soort Telegraaf te worden.
    1
  3168. We need battery electric vehicles whatsoever.
    1
  3169. Nobody denied that and we also need lithium for public transport.
    1
  3170.  @maovotberger7811  😊
    1
  3171. You do understand there is a difference between climate change and air pollution right?
    1
  3172.  @BernhardRottweiler  Not really. The Euro emission standard does not say anything about CO2. Euro 6 vehicles do not have a lower fuel consumption and thus green house gas emissions are just as bad as they were. Electric is the only solution to fight CO2 emissions.
    1
  3173. ​ @BernhardRottweiler  Here in Europe electricity is dirt cheap compared to gasoline and diesel. Emissions of lithium and cobalt mining is MUCH less than lifetime emissions of a diesel or petrol car. Driving electric is always cleaner, even on non-renewable energy.
    1
  3174.  @niccarter284  Only 60% fossil is pretty good. An electric car is always cleaner, even on fossil electricity.
    1
  3175. No it won't. Producing H2 on board requires electricity from the 12V battery. That battery is charged by the alternator which will increase fuel consumption. It's a fraud.
    1
  3176. If you knew some basic physics you would understand why.
    1
  3177. 👍🏻
    1
  3178.  @baaron-noraab  Humans are animals
    1
  3179. Zucht
    1
  3180.  @johnra-x8p  Hybrides zijn het slechtste van beide werelden. Koop nou gewoon een EV en informeer jezelf.
    1
  3181. Yess 😀
    1
  3182. Not at all. Hydrogen cars are over already.
    1
  3183. EVs are far cheaper to maintain.
    1
  3184. Wat een onzin
    1
  3185. It's hypocritical at all. Most people who stop consuming animal products don't do it because they don't like the taste and the texture.
    1
  3186. wrong
    1
  3187.  @joey-pn3xe  Exactly. The battery replacement myth is still so unbelievably strong...
    1
  3188. Battery electric vehicles are always cleaner, despite the fact that making the batteries causes more CO2.
    1
  3189. Dit is fantastisch nieuws. Hopelijk volgen andere wijken spoedig.
    1
  3190. The American grid only produces 0.85 pounds of CO2 per kWh. That is far from 100% fossil.
    1
  3191. What if we use that exact same renewable energy to charge electric vehicles?
    1
  3192. Roy BM dat dus
    1
  3193. Jan-Willem, het is: identiteit. Niet indentiteit 🙂
    1
  3194. They might be interesting but they are needlessly complex and inefficient.
    1
  3195. 1. Buy used 2. A simple wallbox is cheap 3. A non existing problem 4. True, they tend to be a bit higher 5. See 1 and will be even worse for ICE soon 6. Hasn’t been the case for years. 7. Much lower than ICE 8. Not an issue in Europe at least.
    1
  3196. Lol not at all 😂
    1
  3197.  @offroadsnake  Why would we need a world wide standard?
    1
  3198.  @offroadsnake  Well when was your last intercontinental road trip?
    1
  3199.  @offroadsnake  Correct. Like I said, Europe has pretty much decided on CCS now, North America too and China and Japan now have recently colaborated on the new CHAdeMO 3.0 standard.
    1
  3200.  @offroadsnake  Dude, you keep running in circles. I repeat one more time: as long as you do not leave the continent with your vehicle there is no problem. Export vehicles will obviously have the correct charge port installed for the intended area... This is already the case with Tesla selling their vehicles in China.
    1
  3201. ​ @offroadsnake  If this is the biggest concern about electric vehicles I can't really care honestly.
    1
  3202.  @terjesorhaug143  I don't think it has a very big impact on costs.
    1
  3203. Exactly this.
    1
  3204. That is what curbside AC charging is for.
    1
  3205. With current and future diesel prices they definitely will.
    1
  3206.  @donaldduck5700  Weil?
    1
  3207. ok wappie
    1
  3208. Hopefully
    1
  3209. It’s not that bad. It is very likely electric trucks will be allowed to be heavier in total and cost per distance is a lot lower than diesel or hydrogen.
    1
  3210. Inderdaad, veel beter dan diesel of benzine verbranden.
    1
  3211. Nah that doesn't really lower emissions significantly.
    1
  3212. Tess Stickles thank you
    1
  3213. They both start with the same electricity...
    1
  3214. Except that you will always need three times the amount of that green energy.
    1
  3215.  @lucasmachain  But we won’t have enough renewables for many decades to come to justify very inefficient hydrogen cars.
    1
  3216. ​ @lucasmachain  Lithium batteries will be recycled so the lithium won't be lost. Hydrogen cars will never become considerably more efficient due to laws of physics. Hydrogen cars also require materials like lithium, cobalt, nickel and platinum. And yes, of course public transport and bicycles are the obvious choice in many situations but that is not really relevant in this comparison. When it comes to electrifying drive trains we need to make the most efficient choice as fast as possible to reduce CO2 emissions as fast as possible. This is why the vast majority of all road vehicles are going to be battery electric.
    1
  3217. But even then a hydrogen car consumes 3 times the amount of that electricity, no matter how it was produced.
    1
  3218. Range is very usable
    1
  3219. Yes they are
    1
  3220. Jack Konings Veehouderij hebben we niet nodig voor eten.
    1
  3221. Martzen Couperus Gelukkig hoeft alleen de veeteelt er mee te kappen. Probleem opgelost.
    1
  3222. Tim Zeilmaker Haha
    1
  3223. Still not efficient.
    1
  3224. So you thought that hydrogen vehicles do not require cobalt? 😂
    1
  3225.  @josidasilva5515  It's a famous myth. It does not improve efficiency at all.
    1
  3226.  @josidasilva5515  Is there any research paper available on this?
    1
  3227.  @josidasilva5515  Not really. Read the 'Pulse electrolysis' page on wikipedia. There is no clear evidence.
    1
  3228. It’s not.
    1
  3229. Not at all. Hydrogen is a bad solution for vehicles.
    1
  3230. The point obviously is EVs are far less bad.
    1
  3231.  @Likecars70  informeer jezelf
    1
  3232.  @Likecars70  Alleen omdat jij iets niet leuk vindt, betekent niet dat het een ‘hoax’ is.
    1
  3233. The power of electricity
    1
  3234. AdmiralPicard2010 Don’t forget the lack of physical mirrors saves you probably more than a few kilometers.
    1
  3235. speak for yourself.
    1
  3236. On demand HHO generators / Stan Meyer contraptions are a fraud. Not something an engineering channel would want to feature lol
    1
  3237. Hmm interesting case! A bit similar to LNG carriers using the cargo boil off for propulsion.
    1
  3238. Uitstekende ontwikkeling. Nu ook nog even in de nacht graag.
    1
  3239.  @sevennine1335  Ein E-Auto muss nur 1 bis 2 mahl in der Woche laden.
    1
  3240.  @f1neekrants  No they don't xD
    1
  3241.  @f1neekrants  Nope. Bio fuels require waaay too much land.
    1
  3242.  @f1neekrants  You can’t get around physics. It will always remain inefficient. Porsche is not studying bio fuels by the way. They are talking about synthetic fuels. Which are also intrinsically inefficient.
    1
  3243. You are wrong. EV is here to stay.
    1
  3244.  @francescober  Yes, it’s all wrong like I told you already.
    1
  3245.  @francescober  You already go wrong in the first sentence. This is literally the most worn-out piece of misinformation on EVs you can find. It’s almost impressive you still think this is the case in 2024. It literally takes 1 minute of googling to find out that EVs in fact produce far less pollution during their entire lifecycle. All the information is out there. Good luck.
    1
  3246.  @francescober  Not true. I spent years reading this stuff as I was skeptical myself too once. All peer reviewed research shows that EVs produce less CO2 during their life. Only difference is the number of kilometers driven to break even. Ranging from something like 2 to 5 years of average driving. Also, there is simply no other choice. Continuing with fossil fuels is not an option as we all know, as the implications will be far worse than a vanishing European car industry (which was largely caused by themselves by the way).
    1
  3247. Still far better than burning diesel or petrol.
    1
  3248.  @ohyesitsme  meh. Most people want a transition to sustainable energy. Electrification in general is an improvement of quality of life too, in most cases.
    1
  3249. Veehouderij zo snel kogelijk opdoeken.
    1
  3250. Prevent*
    1
  3251. Onwetendheid ten top.
    1
  3252.  @tesla_tap Yes, would be very odd if Tesla ever stated that.
    1
  3253. Dan gaan mensen veel sneller elektrisch rijden, probleem opgelost.
    1
  3254. even more inefficient.
    1
  3255.  @carlosandleon  Hydrogen is not a future technology for passenger vehicles and will never be. It’s simply stupid.
    1
  3256.  @mohamadaliffshafiqazizan2788  Still requires a lot of energy.
    1
  3257.  @mohamadaliffshafiqazizan2788  I googled it, production is only 60% efficient and after that you still need to compress and transport it which also involves a lot of losses.
    1
  3258.  @mohamadaliffshafiqazizan2788  Laws of physics don't change. Efficiency will always remain low compared to battery electric cars.
    1
  3259.  @mohamadaliffshafiqazizan2788  FCEV require 3 times as much power...
    1
  3260.  @mohamadaliffshafiqazizan2788  probably inefficient as well. Cannot find numbers.
    1
  3261.  @mohamadaliffshafiqazizan2788  Physics don’t change
    1
  3262. keano de jong Hoezo? Waterstofauto’s kun je gewoon kopen hoor. Het is alleen super inefficient dus gelukkig is het geen gemeengoed geworden.
    1
  3263. It's not. And neither diesel nor gasoline are a solution for the future.
    1
  3264.  @HOMELANDERFEELS  Ever heard of CO2?
    1
  3265. There is no difference. If you plug in your car, you go to a fast charger.
    1
  3266. Ever heard of fast chargers? You can easily drive that in 2 days in a Tesla.
    1
  3267. Zach Tangen I am talking about FAST chargers. That often takes about 20 minutes...
    1
  3268. nice
    1
  3269. Hydrogen refilling is only a bit faster and when you consider the fact that BEVs charge at night, you actually spend much less time in total at a refueling station.
    1
  3270. Lack of transmission capacity, as mentioned in the video.
    1
  3271. Still requires large numbers of zero emission trucks.
    1
  3272. Please stop mentioning everyone's age in your video titles. It looks ridiculous and is completely unnecessary.
    1
  3273. Statiegeldtroep. Zonder spatie dus.
    1
  3274. Jelwin van Heugten Waarom zou ik?
    1
  3275. Jelwin van Heugten haha 😂
    1
  3276. There is no reason why it wouldn't work in a bigger country.
    1
  3277.  @schulzmj1 Proper EVs have temperature management systems to keep the battery in good condition, making it possible to charge and discharge the battery even at very low temperatures. When parked you plug it in, just like a block heater. As already mentioned, EVs have been doing fine in Scandinavian winters for over a decade.
    1
  3278.  @schulzmj1  It is clear you have no experience in driving an EV.
    1
  3279. Well, the vast majority about EVs is great, that is why they make so much sense.
    1
  3280. @ Als iemand anno 2025 de stikstofproblematiek nog steeds als ‘waanzin’ bestempelt dan kan ik niet anders concluderen dan dat we hier met een wappie te maken hebben.
    1
  3281.  @KingkongAndVipawan  wappie is volledig op zijn plaats
    1
  3282. The argument is not infrastructure but the complete lack of efficiency.
    1
  3283. 10.000 km per jaar, 0,2 kWh per kilometer = 2000 kWh per jaar. Doe dat keer je kWh-prijs.
    1
  3284. No they don’t
    1
  3285. Hybrids were cool 20 years ago
    1
  3286. The best thing is that these things are electric 😎😎
    1
  3287. You forget that synthetic fuels (power to liquid) are horribly inefficient. Also, we have to make new cars anyway, so why not make them electric?
    1
  3288.  @musikSkool  You are trying to drag all sorts of irrelevant reasons into the discussion. The thing is that vehicles only last 10 to 15 years on average. That’s the only thing that counts. New cars will always be needed. Synthetic fuels are, like I said, horribly inefficient so it requires A LOT more electric energy than an EV.
    1
  3289. ja smerig he
    1
  3290. Volgens het artikel gaat het om auto’s van BMW en Mitubishi. 1. Mitsubishi maakt helemaal geen volledig elektrische auto’s dus waarschijnlijk gaat het om zo’n plugin hybride Outlander. 2. De BMW i3 is een totaal andere elektrische auto dan de Kia e-Niro die in Nederland wordt gebruikt met een kleinere actieradius en een lagere laadsnelheid.
    1
  3291. mitch Alff Nee juist niet. Terugleveren aan het net kan straks helemaal niet meer omdat burgers juist gestimuleerd moeten worden hun eigen energie te gebruiken en opslaan. Bijvoorbeeld in accu’s en warmte.
    1
  3292. Hé een wappie
    1
  3293. Pretty small
    1
  3294.  @SoloRenegade Exactly. Much lower losses than happen in the petroleum fuel ecosystem.
    1
  3295.  @SoloRenegade I quote: "Well-to-Tank (WTT) energy efficiencies for gasoline and diesel production are quite high. Compared to energy delivered per gallon of gasoline or diesel, an additional 25% of the energy content is needed from well to tank. Per gallon of fuel the embedded energy consumed in feedstock recovery, processing, storage and transportation, plus fuel production, transportation, storage and distribution is 25% over and above the energy delivered."
    1
  3296.  @SoloRenegade  Youtube doesn't allow to post links. If you google the quote you will find the source. Well to wheel emissions of EVs are always lower, even when mainly fossil fuels are used for charging it. And, as we all know by now, EVs burn far less often.
    1
  3297. Reality is unfair sometimes.
    1
  3298.  @DavidKnowles0  Exactly.
    1
  3299. Electricity will never be free. Therefore driving on hydrogen will always remain 3 times as expensive.
    1
  3300. You are wrong.
    1
  3301. It’s very simple: CO2 emissions need to come down fast. There is no other way to do it.
    1
  3302. Bad choice.
    1
  3303. Mooi toch. Fiat financiert hiermee Gigafactory 4 👍🏻
    1
  3304.  @johnra-x8p  alles wordt gewoon elektrisch. Hybride is allang een gepasseerd station.
    1
  3305.  @johnra-x8p  Laadpalen heb je overal en zo niet dan kun je die aanvragen bij de gemeente.
    1
  3306.  @johnra-x8p  Dat geloof ik best, maar dat betekent nog niet dat hybrides ‘de toekomst’ zijn. Dat zijn ze namelijk niet. En diesel al helemaal niet (nee, ook niet voor vrachtwagens).
    1
  3307.  @johnra-x8p  Onder andere Iveco, DAF, Mercedes, Scania en Tesla fabriceren allemaal al elektrische vrachtwagens die geschikt zijn voor lange afstanden. Het zal dus niet lang meer duren.
    1
  3308. Precies!
    1
  3309. Yes, it’s literally an avalanche of bullshit videos..
    1
  3310.  @haroondaman7162  nobody is forced to do so.
    1
  3311.  @voornaamachternaam3502  Oh dus als een bepaalde sector 'dik geld verdient' dan is het opeens niet erg dat ze extreem vervuilend zijn? xD
    1
  3312. Wonderful argument sir.
    1
  3313. Where would the electricity come from?
    1
  3314.  @jameshunter4386  Nope, unfortunately that is not the case. Driving on hydrogen is incredibly inefficient and would require the battery to be charged much more often than an EV. And no, the battery cannot be charged from the alternator, that would break the first law of thermodynamics you know. You need energy from the grid or another external source to charge it.
    1
  3315.  @jameshunter4386  The car Stanley Meyer presented was a scam. Again, it is impossible due to laws of physics. He died of a cerebral aneurysm.
    1
  3316. good choice
    1
  3317. Never because it would be useless
    1
  3318. Ok wappie
    1
  3319. You forgot about CO2
    1
  3320. Because it will always remain far less efficient.
    1
  3321. NIO is working on this but I wouldn't expect much from it. Battery swapping infrastructure is a lot more expensive than fast chargers. And current fast charging tech is so fast that it really isn't an issue anymore.
    1
  3322. And will always remain the future.
    1
  3323. No you do not need green electricity first. Electric driving is always cleaner than diesel, even if coal is used to produce the electricity.
    1
  3324. Look up: Renewable Energy Certificate.
    1
  3325. Precies :D
    1
  3326.  @arnaldobellucci9033  Electricity emissions are pretty much always lower than diesel or petrol. EVs are still expensive but will eventually become affordable and are much cheaper in use and maintenance.
    1
  3327.  @arnaldobellucci9033  That’s what I said. EVs have been getting cheaper every year for 10 years straight lol.
    1
  3328. Lol not at all. Hydrogen is over in Europe as well.
    1
  3329.  @callumhardy5098  I know about the Mirai and JCB. Still horribly inefficient. In the meantime EVs are selling like hot cakes in Western Europe and charging locations are growing fast.
    1
  3330.  @real_mojo Of course. Heavy duty electric trucks already exist and tractors will too eventually. Just takes more time.
    1
  3331.  @real_mojo  Plenty of successful examples are driving around in Norway as we speak, even snow plows. Only a few years ago we couldn't imagine trucks with 1000 kWh batteries, today they simply exist.
    1
  3332. Haha
    1
  3333. Ja laten we lekker allemaal achter gaan lopen met ontwikkelingen xD
    1
  3334. Lithium is mined from brine lakes. Not really invasive at all. And yes, batteries can and will be reused and recycled.
    1
  3335. Lol you just don’t like change
    1
  3336.  @karlodomic2890  🤢
    1
  3337.  @joshlasky8138  Meat and dairy is just terribly inefficient, incomparable to the vast majority of other sorts of foods.
    1
  3338.  @The_KingDoge  Where did I claim there is not enough?
    1
  3339. Cobalt is used in pretty much any electrical appliance (including hydrogen cars) and in the desulphurisation process of diesel and gasoline.
    1
  3340.  @michaelfrehner4858  Cobalt is used in refineries, not in the vehicle itself. And your numbers are far off. An EV is cleaner after less than 50k miles.
    1
  3341.  @michaelfrehner4858  The cobalt is in the batteries. I think the numbers you have based your calculations on are outdated or do not include all aspects of fuel production. Here is a nice and realistic report that shows how to make these comparisons: https://www.oliver-krischer.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/English_Studie.pdf You can see that a Tesla Model 3 with 75 kWh battery is compared to a Mercedes C220D. After 30000 km (20k miles) of driving the Tesla is cleaner.
    1
  3342. Prices have dropped massively
    1
  3343. Plenty of companies preparing for this.
    1
  3344. But hydrogen cars use MUCH MOOORREEEE of that same electricity.
    1
  3345.  @freestyleskyline  Take a look: https://images.app.goo.gl/GsS9ixHNup3p4pa49
    1
  3346.  @zhaokwong5544  yes, for you.
    1
  3347. Because it is not really an issue.
    1
  3348. Burning natural gas produces shit loads of CO2…
    1
  3349.  @usmanali81  Only when the balance is maintained, as you probably know.
    1
  3350.  @usmanali81  Not at all comparable. That happened over a far longer time span. The relationship between the industrial age, highly increased CO2 concentration in the atmosphere and climate change is undeniable, as we all know by now.
    1
  3351.  @usmanali81  Nuclear will play a role, but the majority of energy will be wind and solar. Wind and solar have proven themselves for decades and are capable of making big dents in CO2 emissions fast.
    1
  3352.  @usmanali81  It is clear that you are the one who doesn’t have a clue. There are countless reports available on life cycle analysis of wind and solar. Inform yourself.
    1
  3353. Yes busses on liquid propane are cleaner regarding toxic emissions, but CO2 emissions are barely lower than diesel.
    1
  3354.  @deepspacecow2644  Nope.
    1
  3355.  @Yappa1996  De realiteit is soms lastig.
    1
  3356. David Scherder 👍🏻 borstvoeding van koeien 🤮
    1
  3357. Odin Kusters Veehouders moeten gewoon weg, probleem opgelost.
    1
  3358. Hoezo zou Shell geen uitstoot in Nederland hebben?
    1
  3359.  @dfreadhoff  Exactly.
    1
  3360. Nope it's not! Hydrogen is a stupid solution.
    1
  3361.  @josefmalina3273  Too inefficient
    1
  3362.  @josefmalina3273  It’s not.
    1
  3363.  @josefmalina3273  Replace [DOT] by a real dot in the link above.
    1
  3364. Apparently links get removed automatically...
    1
  3365. So what do you propose instead?
    1
  3366. It’s not dishonest. Both hydrogen cars and EVs require the same electricity. But hydrogen cars waste massive amounts of that along the way.
    1
  3367. Exactly
    1
  3368. Too inefficient
    1
  3369. 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
  3370. Wrong. Battery production emissions are decreasing every year (we are currently at about 100 kg of CO2 per kWh). Batteries last a very long time, current generation will probably last longer than the vehicles itself. Hydrogen cars have small batteries too and a fuel cell that degrades over time and eventually requires replacement. Same for the whole high pressure system (including the tanks) that last about 8 years.
    1
  3371.  @BlakeB415  Current high end EVs can already deliver a similar range. Most people don’t want an EV because they don’t know how charging actually works. 90% of the charging happens at night, or at work, or at the shopping center. These charging moments require 0 minutes of waiting. On long stretches you can easily drive 2-3 hours before stopping at a fast charger where you will very rarely find yourself literally waiting for it to charge because you are doing things that you would normally do too: go to the restroom, eat and drink something, take a rest, etc. Real waiting for your charge is very rare in real life. And all that while using only 1/3rd of the amount of electric energy compared to a hydrogen car.
    1
  3372. There is no electricity in the Appalachian valley?
    1
  3373. But terribly inefficient.
    1
  3374.  @williammeek4078  exactly.
    1
  3375.  @ExplorerBen7  Impossble. An EV will always be faster to charge on an equal power output. Splitting water actually takes quite a lot of energy and then you also have to compress it in order to get into the car.
    1
  3376.  @ExplorerBen7  All of the factors you mentioned (mass of the EV, volume of the hydrogen created, burn rate of the hydrogen) have nothing to do with the comparison of charging / refilling time. Fact is that charging a battery is about 95% efficient whereas making hydrogen and compressing it is about 40% efficient. And then burning it inside an internal combustion engine is obviously a lot less efficient than using the electric motor in the EV. The two methods are miles apart.
    1
  3377.  @ExplorerBen7  Sorry, but it is simply impossible due to the aforementioned differences in efficiency.
    1
  3378.  @ExplorerBen7  It’s just physics.
    1
  3379.  @ExplorerBen7  I assume you are talking about in car hydrogen production and then adding that to the gasoline-air mixture in order to improve your gasoline fuel consumption. That is impossible simply because you need more gasoline to produce the hydrogen onboard than you are able to get back out of it again. If you are referring to external hydrogen production with grid power and then (partially) running a vehicle on that, yes that could work.
    1
  3380.  @ExplorerBen7  No you cannot create energy out of hydrogen produced on demand from the alternator. It is just simple physics. That many people do it doesn’t prove anything. It’s a scam. Period.
    1
  3381.  @ExplorerBen7  Every ampere hour that is pumped into that battery (and then used for electrolysis) is created by using EXTRA gasoline. People with these contraptions installed are getting better mileage because they think they are getting better mileage. It is just confirmation bias.
    1
  3382.  @ExplorerBen7  You cannot create that gain out of thin air. Look up the first law of thermodynamics.
    1
  3383.  @ExplorerBen7  Because that 2/3 of gasoline is wasted in heat.
    1
  3384.  @ExplorerBen7  There is no energy created, only converted with losses. Gain = 0
    1
  3385.  @ExplorerBen7  Sure, because you use grid power to make the hydrogen.
    1
  3386.  @ExplorerBen7  I know these videos. They are an obvious scam.
    1
  3387.  @ExplorerBen7  It’s just wishful thinking. Again, it is impossible. Not because I do not want it or because I don’t like it, it’s because of simple physics.
    1
  3388. All vehicles will be electric, and you better get used to it soon.
    1
  3389. Of course they saw it coming, they just decided to do nothing.
    1
  3390. Of course not lol
    1
  3391. Of course, but you will steed need large numbers of trucks.
    1
  3392. You obviously have no clue. Ever heard of fast charging?
    1
  3393. Dat zegt niks. Vlees en zuivel gaat per definitie gepaard met leed.
    1
  3394. No you don't, you only think you want a hydrogen car.
    1
  3395. Check the natural gas price…
    1
  3396.  @deepg2477  BEV is perfect for pretty much any passenger car. Hydrogen is completely unnecessary in this class.
    1
  3397.  @deepg2477  It's just a matter of physics. Lithium availability won't be an issue for a very long time and then there will be recycling like Redwood Materials is working on. Hydrogen cars also require lithium, cobalt, nickel and platinum so it is not a solution for material availability problems. Mass adoption of hydrogen cars would slow down the energy transition because it causes a lot more CO2 per kilometer.
    1
  3398. Common misconception. Batteries don't end up in landfills because they are full of valuable materials. Battery recycling has been a thing for decades and this will simply adapt to EV batteries. Most people have no clue about battery production. It's not as bad as you might think. Lithium mining is not invasive and there is plenty of it. Cobalt is a different story, but the presence of this material is declining rapidly in battery designs. CO2 emissions are currently at less than 100 kg of CO2 per kWh. The bottom line is that production of batteries is rather quickly compensated because of the super high efficiency of an EV. An FCEV is inefficient its entire lifetime. Also, fuel cells degrade over time and also require 'rare earth' materials just like batteries and FCEVs also have (smaller) lithium-ion batteries.
    1
  3399.  @stijnhs  Hydrogen cars are not significantly lighter than EVs. The tanks are rather heavy to withstand the enormous pressure.
    1
  3400. Not really. A lot of effort is put into electrification of vehicles (this is already paying off) and discouraging flying.
    1
  3401. It’s called physics.
    1
  3402.  @210SAi  The reason hydrogen cars are a stupid idea is directly related to physics and to be more precise: laws of thermodynamics.
    1
  3403. aka never
    1
  3404. stoer man
    1
  3405. For industrial applications, probably yes. For cars, no.
    1
  3406. Jij hebt liever smerige lucht?!
    1
  3407. Please stop. eFuels are the dumbest solution and will fortunately never be a thing for road vehicles.
    1
  3408. As long as it is affordable*
    1
  3409.  @deuitblinker4820  Naïef als het om samenzweringstheorieën gaat ja.
    1
  3410.  @deuitblinker4820  dat bedoel ik dus 😂😂
    1
  3411.  @deuitblinker4820  en het wappiegeneuzel gaat verder..
    1
  3412. Yeah, for ships and possibly aircraft.
    1
  3413.  @jessienameles5063  Laat dat puntje maar weg.
    1
  3414. Most lithium is mined from brine lakes by evaporation. Lithium mining is not so bad at all.
    1
  3415. It uses carbon, but not more.
    1
  3416. Exactly
    1
  3417.  @HelmuthGerka  I know. I live in a city and I walk or cycle to work every day. We still need A LOT of lithium for electrification of all other vehicles.
    1
  3418. Self fueling? You mean inside the vehicle?
    1
  3419.  @beehappy7797 yup..
    1
  3420. They are not
    1
  3421. Je hebt je duidelijk nooit in elektrische auto’s verdiept. Elektrisch is verreweg de meest efficiënte en schone manier om een auto aan te drijven. Waterstof is eigenlijk allang een gepasseerd station voor auto’s omdat het ontzettend inefficient is en omdat waterstof eigenlijk nooit duurzaam geproduceerd is zoals Vugoseq al aangeeft.
    1
  3422. Dit.
    1
  3423. Lol of course that is not cheaper. That way the government would need to keep capturing CO2 from the air FOREVER compared to paying incentives for just a limited amount of time.
    1
  3424.  @Alphabet7  Yes they are.
    1
  3425.  @Alphabet7  The difference is about half the amount of CO2 per km. This difference grows every year.
    1
  3426.  @Alphabet7  prove it
    1
  3427. "Dat is volledig schone elektriciteit, die niet eerst speciaal is opgewekt maar als restproduct ontstaat door het terugwinnen van rem-energie." Die energie is op zijn beurt weer afkomstig van de verbrandingsmotor. Zelfs als je een EV met 100% grijze stroom oplaadt is hij schoner dan welke hybride dan ook. Simpelweg als gevolg van de efficiëntie van energiecentrales en elektromotoren ten opzichte van olieraffinage en verbrandingsmotoren.
    1
  3428. I read that using CO2 as a refrigerant is possible. But why isn't it used more often?
    1
  3429.  @fritt_wastaken  Ok, so the overall efficiency of a system using CO2 is lower compared to other refrigerants?
    1
  3430. Turns out you are completely wrong
    1
  3431. rons4620 Because they use electricity to make hydrogen in the first place.
    1
  3432. Herman Willems precies
    1
  3433.  @trowawayacc  Electrons can also be ‘harvested’ from anywhere. That’s not the point. The point is you would need many times more solar panels and wind turbines to power the same number of cars. Surplus energy will be stored in EVs because there is always an average number of cars charging at any given moment of the day, especially combined with smart grids. We need a lot of green hydrogen, but for other applications.
    1
  3434. Donald Heitger Driving on electricity is always cleaner.
    1
  3435.  @waterloo123100  Doesn't come close to the devastating effects of oil drilling, transportation and refining.
    1
  3436. If you had spent 2 seconds reading the other comments you would have discovered that you are not the only one…
    1
  3437.  @daydreamer8373 correct
    1
  3438. Stikstof is een lokaal probleem omdat er in Nederland extreem veel veeteelt is.
    1
  3439. Lol je vergeet CO2
    1
  3440.  @dgdgfdfdhhd  Hahaha
    1
  3441. Not at all. Emissions of energy consumption during use of the vehicles has a far higher impact on life cycle emissions. Battery production is currently at < 100 kg of CO2 per kWh produced. That is easily compensated for within the first few years of driving.
    1
  3442. The world needs insane numbers of EVs to decarbonize transport.
    1
  3443. Exactly.
    1
  3444.  @jothaman3555  Milieu van Nederland*
    1
  3445. Eh wtf is with all the anti EV comments here
    1
  3446.  @jdnrotterdam2150  Ik zie dat prima voor me hoor. Er zullen inderdaad aardig wat laadpalen in het straatbeeld en langs de snelweg verschijnen. En die energie? wat is je probleem?
    1
  3447.  @jdnrotterdam2150  Het net kan het prima aan, dat heeft Tennet zelf aangegeven. We gaan immers nooit allemaal tegelijk laden en zelfs niet dagelijks.
    1
  3448.  @jdnrotterdam2150 Er komt uiteraard een grote hoeveelheid laadpalen bij, dus dat zal wel loslopen. Laden duurt waarschijnlijk een nachtje, als hij bijna leeg was. Het laden hoeft niet dagelijks te gebeuren met de grote accu's die inmiddels op de markt zijn. Die stekkers worden geblokkeerd door de auto en de laadpaal.
    1
  3449.  @jdnrotterdam2150 Dat lijkt me ook begrijpelijk. Met een dergelijk jonge auto in bezit zou ik waarschijnlijk ook nog even wachten. Nu een nieuwe hybride aanschaffen zou ik echter niemand aanraden.
    1
  3450.  @jdnrotterdam2150  Tja, wij van WC-eend.. Hybride auto's bouwen is natuurlijk iets waar Toyota een lange geschiedenis in heeft en nog altijd heel goed in is. Hoe langer ze de verkoop daarvan kunnen oprekken hoe beter voor hen. Een volledig elektrische auto ontwikkelen kost enorm veel geld, dus dat willen ze nog even voor zich uitschuiven. In een werelddeel waar de laadinfrastructuur al zo goed is (en nog veel beter zal worden de komende jaren) en waar auto's waar rook uit komt gewoonweg verboden zullen worden, is het niet slim om anno 2019 nog een auto met een verbrandingsmotor aan te schaffen. Om verder nog maar te zwijgen over het comfort van een elektrische aandrijving en de lage kilometer- en onderhoudskosten.
    1
  3451. JDN Rotterdam ik had het over een nieuwe.
    1
  3452. Lol guess what, electric vehicles and hydrogen cars start with the same electricity........
    1
  3453.  @rexli1887  I see. But Electricity -> wheel (Hydrogen EV) is more like 30% at max.
    1
  3454.  @rexli1887  Yeah I referred to electricity to wheel efficiency. This is always the same, regardless of the energy source. Fuel cell efficiency is only 60% in a best case scenario.
    1
  3455.  @rexli1887  But I understand the main point about the comparison of natural gas combustion in an engine.
    1
  3456. You have no clue
    1
  3457. Onzin, elektrisch rijden is altijd schoner dan welke dieselmotor dan ook.
    1
  3458.  @pionieresvizzero2224  Nobody would use the hydrogen option in such a vehicle.
    1
  3459. Geen vlees eten.
    1
  3460.  @kimvanhoutum815  goed bezig. die wegen door het regenwoud bedoel je?
    1
  3461.  @rafaelcosta-oreivem6922  ?
    1
  3462. Fantastic video. So is there a difference between a brushless DC and brushless AC 3 phase motor?
    1
  3463. Milan Swoboda SILENCE
    1
  3464. Haha das wird nie kommen.
    1
  3465. If solar panels do not shut off in time in cases of over supply, voltage and frequency gets too high resulting - in the worst case - in power loss.
    1
  3466. It's not the amount of electric energy that is the problem. It's about spreading the load. That will probably be no problem at all because EVs only need about 10 kWh per day on average.
    1
  3467. Hydrogen cars require platinum, cobalt, nickel and lithium as well...
    1
  3468.  @waldnew  True, but many other materials are needed for the extra required wind turbines and solar panels.
    1
  3469. Battery electric is a MUCH better deal.
    1
  3470. What are you talking about? MANY companies are working on recycling facilities for EV batteries. But first we need to mine a lot of materials to create enough batteries to recycle in the first place.
    1
  3471.  @tonyarce5427  What company are you at?
    1
  3472. Lol
    1
  3473. Only 40% of German electricity is generated by coal...
    1
  3474. Of course it could go down a bit, but it will always remain much more expensive than electricity.
    1
  3475. Yeah it's ALL a C0nsPiRaCyyy!11!! 😂
    1
  3476. Chris Van Oosten nope
    1
  3477. 😂
    1
  3478. Still far and far cleaner than a gasoline or diesel car. And no, EVs are not charged with diesel generators.
    1
  3479.  @okieg8960  yeah right, what exactly does that prove about total life cycle emissions? Nothing. Look up the numbers.
    1
  3480.  @okieg8960  restarted?
    1
  3481. You are clueless. EVs are simply the most sensible solution to decarbonise transport.
    1
  3482. It's simple: animal agriculture has to end as soon as possible.
    1
  3483. Leuk idee, maar wie betaalt dat dan?
    1
  3484. Genau!
    1
  3485.  @Tresla  Model 3 Standard Range for example. They perform great.
    1
  3486. littleboy4084 vertel
    1
  3487.  @borgiobesieger2806  Ik hou het graag bij 0%.
    1
  3488.  @borgiobesieger2806  Ik geef geen cent uit aan producten van de veehouderij.
    1
  3489.  @borgiobesieger2806  Ik heb het over veeboeren.
    1
  3490.  @borgiobesieger2806  Ja natuurlijk, wat dacht jij dan.
    1
  3491.  @borgiobesieger2806  Jawel hoor. De veehouderij moet verdwijnen.
    1
  3492.  @borgiobesieger2806  Inderdaad.
    1
  3493. Elektrische auto’s worden elk jaar goedkoper en zijn BPM-vrij. Gaat de goede kant op dus.
    1
  3494.  @PME  Je kan veel beter elektrische auto’s opladen met overtollige energie.
    1
  3495.  @VriendRick  Gas is gewoon binnenkort voorbij, of je het nou wil of niet. Biomassa maakt maar een heel klein gedeelte uit van de elektriciteitsopwekking.
    1
  3496. wappie
    1
  3497. Hydrogen is hydrogen. Not water.
    1
  3498. An EV only requires 1/3 of the elctric energy. LPG still causes a lot of CO2 emissions.
    1
  3499. Er zijn zat andere leuke elektrische auto’s te koop als je Tesla’s niet mooi vindt.
    1
  3500.  @Lilacwinedine  rechts? lijkt me sterk
    1
  3501.  @Lilacwinedine  Mogelijk sinds Musk z’n rare ideeën van de afgelopen paar jaar, maar daarvoor waren het meestal geen rechtse mensen die zich tot Tesla’s aangetrokken voelden.
    1
  3502. No they won't. Current EVs are already better than hydrogen cars.
    1
  3503.  @michaelr5322  Charging does not have to take hours haha
    1
  3504. You don't need to because guess what is required to PRODUCE that hydrogen? That exact same electricity.
    1
  3505.  @4literv6  ‘did’?
    1
  3506. Current batteries last hundres of thousands of kilometers. Lithium is not scarce and they can be reused and then recycled.
    1
  3507. It is not because it is horribly inefficient.
    1
  3508. Electricity production is always cleaner than gasoline or diesel.
    1
  3509. You don’t need home charging to drive an EV. Curbside charging works fine and can be done with smart charging controllers that vary the power during the day. Even 1 to 2 kW for overnight charging is enough for your average driving.
    1
  3510.  @fidalfadel  About 8 chargers within a one minute walk around me. It is a lot of work indeed, but definitely possible. It’s a gradual process.
    1
  3511.  @Drew70721  Correct and that is exactly what is needed. Although wild cows will continue to exist.
    1
  3512.  @Drew70721  Cows that live in the wild and are not used by humans. Existing cows will obviously just be slaughtered as the transition to a vegan world would be a gradual process. The point is that farmers will be breeding them less over time. You cannot eat meat without contributing to cruelty.
    1
  3513. Lol. Hydrogen requires 3 times as much electric energy and synthetic fuels require 5 times as much electric energy. What are you talking about?
    1
  3514. 😂😂 cope harder
    1
  3515. Nope it is not
    1
  3516. These will be great on the used market soon.
    1
  3517. Nichemarkt?
    1
  3518.  @Nietzointeressantdoen Begrijpend lezen is blijkbaar niet aan jou besteed. Kanjer!
    1
  3519.  @basook6116  Hard to say.
    1
  3520. Theoretically every parking space can be equipped with a charger. Infrastructure for hydrogen is NOT there. The only thing you can reuse of an existing petrol station is the canopy and the shop. Building fast chargers at these locations is a lot easier and cheaper.
    1
  3521.  @richardgourlay5191  Well the reason is that hydrogen is inherently inefficient compared to fully electric and would thus slow down the energy transition and the reduction of CO2 emissions. Every hydrogen fuel cell car is practically already a hybrid. They all have small lithium ion batteries on board.
    1
  3522. Kuikens zitten niet meer in een ei.
    1
  3523. Combustion engines running on hydrogen are out of the question because this makes it even more inefficient.
    1
  3524. There is not. Hydrogen is and will remain very inefficient simply because of a few simple laws of physics.
    1
  3525.  @TheFanatic340  I did a lot of research because I once believed driving on hydrogen hydrogen would be a great idea. Even if it is possible to make hydrogen in a more efficient way in the future like you described, you still will lose massive amounts during compression, transport and storage. Production of hydrogen is only a small part of the efficiency problem.
    1
  3526.  @TheFanatic340  " Transportation infrastructure is no different than our current model with gasoline, by tanker trucks. " -That's the whole problem.. "Even electric has huge power loss over great distances. " -Only a few per cent. Doesn't come close to the insanely low efficiency of distributing hydrogen. "hundreds of new powerplants that run on natural gas, coal, or nuclear." -You tell me where you want to get three times that amount electricity to supply that same amount of cars with hydrogen.
    1
  3527.  @TheFanatic340  Hydrogen will never be nearly as efficient as batteries. Using solar panels to produce electricity and store this in batteries will at least remain twice as efficient (under current circumstances three times). Battery production is not as bad as many people think. Here is a recent article that reports only 61-106kgCO2-eq/kWh for production. This results in a turning point of about 50.000 kilometers (not miles!) when compared to an equal petrol powered vehicle. https://www.ivl.se/download/18.14d7b12e16e3c5c36271070/1574923989017/C444.pdf Lithium is not rare at all, this is another famous misconception. The industry might worry about the supply of cobalt and nickel, not lithium.
    1
  3528. What will happen with millions of tons of wasted batteries, fuel cells and fuel tanks from hydrogen cars?
    1
  3529.  @Novosadjanin82  Not really. Batteries of hydrogen cars cycle a lot more so need to be replaced earlier. Byproduct of hydrogen is loads of CO2 because of all the electricity needed to make it.
    1
  3530.  @Novosadjanin82  Yet you need three times of that exact same electricity for a hydrogen car. The batteries in hydrogen fuel cell cars are EXACTLY the same, only smaller.
    1
  3531. 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
  3532. ​ @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
  3533.  @triumvir_hunt  For certain applications yes. Not for cars. Hydrogen will always remain about three times as expensive as electricity.
    1
  3534. Why don’t you look up the most recent news about the Freemantle Highway?
    1
  3535. Great choice, you won’t regret the EV.
    1
  3536. Unlikely. The hydrogen tanks and fuel cell would take up way too much space and also cost a lot to manufacture. Driving on hydrogen is much more expensive and with the rapid development of fast chargers pretty much nobody would ever use the hydrogen option.
    1
  3537. They already have a really long range.
    1
  3538. Which will eventually decrease consumptions. Also, in the end these other parts of the world will also start decreasing animal farming. We have to start somewhere right?
    1
  3539. In 2030 mag in heel Amsterdam (dus ook het gebied buiten de A10) geen auto met verbrandingsmotor meer rijden.
    1
  3540. Volledig elektrisch is nog beter inderdaad en dat zal de overheid ook zeker stimuleren. Hybride is slechts een minimum eis.
    1
  3541. Stikstof heeft sowieso niks met klimaat te maken grapjas
    1
  3542. It doesn't matter where the electricity for the hydrogen production comes from. It always remains inefficient.
    1
  3543. A Fiat Panda also has the window control switches in the center console.
    1
  3544. You are clueless
    1
  3545. Weg met de veehouderij
    1
  3546. Ja, het is de redding om CO2-uitstoot zo snel mogelijk naar beneden te krijgen.
    1
  3547. Correct. There are no advantages.
    1
  3548.  @optimistx4187  Inderdaad.
    1
  3549. A lot more renewable than fossil fuels
    1
  3550.  @syzyphyz  As long as it isn’t burned it is at least a lot more renewable depending on the recycling abilities.
    1
  3551. You would regret that.
    1
  3552. Lol when did they state that? 😂
    1
  3553. Get a dynamic contract.
    1
  3554. Not efficient enough for daily balancing.
    1
  3555. Well it is mainly the burning of coal that is very bad regarding emissions. Open strip coal mining is of course invasive to the landscape but that is about it.
    1
  3556. Nope
    1
  3557.  @bertrackmunisz1684 genau das
    1
  3558.  @neliz8  in 2014 blijven hangen?
    1
  3559. That's just stupid. Both Diesel and petrol use have to decrease as fast as possible.
    1
  3560. Tuurlijk wel, er komt gewoon een dag dat je geen voertuig met verbrandingsmotor meer kan kopen.
    1
  3561.  @wilfredprins9718  Neehoor. Waterstof voor personenauto's (en motorfietsen) is allang een gepasseerd station om een tweetal logische redenen. Het is tergend inefficient en zou daarom alleen maar een averechts effect op het behalen van de klimaatdoelen hebben. Daarnaast is het hele ecosysteem van waterstof ook nog eens erg complex waardoor het duur en onderhoudsgevoelig is (zowel productie, opslag, transport als de auto's zelf).
    1
  3562. Wilfred Prins Je vergeet alleen even dat je om waterstof te maken nog véél meer van die windmolens nodig hebt...
    1
  3563.  @wilfredprins9718  Waarom begin je dan over windmolens? Je kunt elektrische auto's ook prima opladen met 'milieuvriendelijke' gascentrales en zonnepanelen. Het grote verschil is dat je voor waterstof drie keer zoveel gascentrales en zonnepanelen nodig hebt. Ja, zo inefficient is waterstof dus.
    1
  3564. ​ @wilfredprins9718  Onzin. Om brandstofcellen te maken heb je net zo goed delfstoffen nodig zoals platinum. Daarnaast slijten brandstofcellen sneller dan meeste accu's en moeten dus vaker vervangen worden. Tevens zitten er in waterstofauto's ook kleine lithium-ion-accu's die ook relatief snel slijten doordat ze veel meer volledige cycli doormaken als gevolg van het vele bufferen en hun lage capaciteit.
    1
  3565. Wilfred Prins Die dingen worden vanzelf verboden 😉
    1
  3566. en dat is maar goed ook
    1
  3567. Still much cleaner than any diesel truck.
    1
  3568.  @purelysmetalnightcore  Nobody claims almond milk is the one and only solution. In general plant based foods are far more efficient to produce.
    1
  3569.  @totenfurwotan4478  no bugs needed.
    1
  3570.  @gidzmobug2323  Why would that be? Government mandates are perfect for eliminating polluting activities.
    1
  3571.  @ChristiaanHW  Both would require a long transition period. Doesn't mean one should happen before the other.
    1
  3572. To make what green?
    1
  3573. Yeah lets just ignore CO2 emissions and air quality…
    1
  3574.  @Newlinjim  Fee per mile
    1
  3575. That accounts for any car, electric or not.
    1
  3576. precies!
    1
  3577.  @bertramkool  Dat is toch raar?
    1
  3578.  @bertramkool  Niet echt, niemand is immers perfect.
    1
  3579. Nope
    1
  3580. Because it is horribly inefficient.
    1
  3581. You mean an electrolyzer in the car? 😄
    1
  3582.  @kpg1973  I know, but that was not the point. You claimed NL ‘only has flower farmers’ while in fact this is not even close to reality.
    1
  3583. yes sir!
    1
  3584. Both hydrogen and Porsches synthetic fuels are stupid ideas because they are horribly inefficient. Nobody claims EVs are zero emission, they are low emission. Battery production emissions are compensated for as soon as you start driving.
    1
  3585.  @sombraarthur  You are wrong. It takes less than 20k miles to compensate. Here is a wonderful report explaining why: https://www.avere.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/englisch_Studie-EAuto-versus-Verbrenner_CO2.pdf Also: even if a 50% efficient combustion engine existed, it is still is horribly inefficient compared to electric cars. Combustion engines are over.
    1
  3586.  @sombraarthur  Yeah, correct. I meant ‘compensating occurs during driving’. 3 to 4 years is indeed correct and that is totally fine because an average car lasts 12 years. And yes, of course classic cars will be around for a while. That is fine. But regarding new cars combustion engines are pretty much completely over in 10 years for most countries.
    1
  3587. "Why use a fuel cell at all, if they are so inefficient?" Because using it in a IC engine is even worse....
    1
  3588.  @laura-ann.0726  Oh yes of course are EVs the best solution. Even with most average (rather carbon intense) grid energy mixes driving electric is already far cleaner - not to mention on 100% PV.
    1
  3589. Piotr Dudała Totally agree. Hydrogen is mind-bogglingly stupid in general. Using it for seasonal storage in a few decades might be bv something. But I am not convinced either.
    1
  3590. Ook al rij je op grijze stroom, dan is het nog steeds schoner dan benzine of diesel.
    1
  3591. Het gaat er ook niet om of het leuk is of niet.
    1
  3592. Had je nou maar opgelet bij natuurkunde he
    1
  3593. Jup
    1
  3594. Because that doesn’t fit the anti EV narrative
    1
  3595. Airplanes run on kerosine, which is very similar to diesel.
    1
  3596. There is no hydrogen ecosystem here in The Netherlands at all. Just three small refilling stations. Barely any hydrogen cars. That’s it. And no, there is no such thing as free electricity.
    1
  3597.  @jimmacgregor4122  Because letting the market decide would take too long. There is no time to lose when it comes to lowering emissions.
    1
  3598. Hyundai is selling lots of great EV’s in the meantime. Wasting energy is ridiculous when there are only small amounts of renewables. Refilling hydrogen is not as convenient as gas or diesel.
    1
  3599. lol you have clearly no clue
    1
  3600. 😂
    1
  3601. Yeah lets just wait on other countries first before we do anything!!11! LOL
    1
  3602. Exactly
    1
  3603. reduce
    1
  3604.  @MosheBenChaim  Rijkelijk beschikbaar wetenschappelijk onderzoek heb je voor het gemak alleen even achterwegen gelaten.
    1
  3605. But hydrogen is terribly inefficient and therefore even less sustainable.
    1
  3606.  @junethefirst  You are correct. But still 95 is a safe speed for Autobahn use.
    1
  3607. Fout. Het waren er in 2019 maar zo’n 100.000. De jaren ervoor minder: https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/dossier/dossier-asiel-migratie-en-integratie/hoeveel-immigranten-komen-naar-nederland- In Utrecht wonen ruim 350.000 mensen. Moeilijk he statistiek?
    1
  3608.  @Neojhun  Haha
    1
  3609. Driving on compressed air is horribly inefficient. Battery electric is the only sensible solution for low carbon transportation.
    1
  3610.  @tinytownsoftware7989  Truck drivers need to take rest time by law after a certain number of driving hours. At least here in Europe. A perfect moment for fast charging.
    1
  3611.  @tinytownsoftware7989  It's simply a matter of faster chargers. Tesla is planning the Megacharger network for the Semi. This would allow for 1 MW of charging power. But even at the charging speeds you mentioned many trucking companies would be able to operate perfectly fine as most trucks do not drive more than 600 miles per day on average.
    1
  3612.  @marknicolich5789  Yeah half an hour is definitely ok every hundreds of kilometers. Lithium availability is not really a problem. There is plenty. EV batteries cannot be compared to phone batteries at all. EV batteries easily last 10+ years. AC systems only use about 1 to 2 kW, that is absolutely nothing compared to what a truck drivetrain consumes.
    1
  3613. This is a tv show for children?
    1
  3614.  @noahliasam7407  Slecht?
    1
  3615. Als je je een beetje had ingelezen in de materie dan begreep je wel waarom elektrische auto's beter zijn voor het milieu.
    1
  3616. 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
  3617. Not at all as 100% fossil electricity is quite hard to find these days.
    1
  3618.  @philgooddr.7850  Again, 100% fossil electricity doesn’t exist. Look it up.
    1
  3619.  @philgooddr.7850 'Enough for more CO2 per mile of a BEV than with a good thermal or hybrid car.' Again, wrong. Even in these worst case scenarios you are describing EVs produces less CO2 than comparable ICE cars. Data is clear about this.
    1
  3620.  @philgooddr.7850  Your numbers are far off. A Prius consumes about 5 liters of petrol per 100 km, which is 45 kWh per 100 km. This equates to about 11 kg CO2 per 100 km. USA electricity mix = 0,4 kg CO2 per kWh. Thus the Tesla causes only 6 kg of CO2 per 100 km.
    1
  3621.  @philgooddr.7850  At night there often is a lot of wind energy. The 'charging at night on coal power' is a myth. Therefore using a country's average is perfectly justified. Yes, the Prius is obviously a great choice if you really need an ICE car. But it can never be better than a fully electric car when it comes to CO2 emissions and no, you don't need to have both. The Prius consumes 16 kWh per 100 km according to WLTP, so more than the current facelift Model 3 (13,2 kWh per 100 km). Also, the Prius won't consume only 3,5 liters per 100 km when it is running in full ICE mode - so especially on longer trips the Prius will be a lot worse than the Model 3.
    1
  3622.  @philgooddr.7850  The point is the Prius never gets 3.5 L per 100 kn in ICE mode in non urban environment. It would be impossible for any gasoline car of this size. EPA proves this: 4.2 L/100 km highway driving. EPA consumption of the Model 3 is 18 kWh / 100 km.
    1
  3623. Hydrogen is terrible.
    1
  3624. Wrong. Electric is the only way to get CO2 emissions down as fast as possible.
    1
  3625.  @nobatteryelectricvehicles7659  No problem at all. EVs have been getting cheaper every year and this will - of course - continue to do so. Synthetic fuels are an incredible inefficient way of powering vehicles. It would require about 4 times more electric energy.
    1
  3626.  @nobatteryelectricvehicles7659  They are getting cheaper. Synthetic fuels are just dumb, even worse than hydrogen.
    1
  3627. But still causes a lot of CO2 emissions.
    1
  3628. Excited about petrol cars? The oil industry is still one of the biggest cobalt consumers. In the meantime there are plenty of cobalt free EVs available.
    1
  3629.  @718EngrCo  Specifying the car takes place at the dealership. They order the car at the manufacturer.
    1
  3630. GameWekelijks Het gaat vooral om stikstof. Dat heeft niks met klimaat te maken.
    1
  3631.  @MrRez808  Not really. Hydrogen fuel cells have been presented as 'the future' for many decades already and still remain very inefficient. They require at least three times as much electricity as a typical EV. Apart from that they are heavily complex to build and maintain. So no, they are not more future proof at all.
    1
  3632.  @MrRez808  Yea EV production and adoption seems to be going in the right direction.
    1
  3633. He mentioned clearly the petrol emissions are well to wheel.
    1
  3634. Exactly 😀
    1
  3635.  @Calibre336  lol
    1
  3636. Nope. Ethanol requires vast amounts of arable land to produce. There simply is not enough of it. Covering fields with solar panels is many times more efficient to produce power for vehicles.
    1
  3637. 70 to 80% from the source of the electricity (that is what is relevant) is very accurate.
    1
  3638. These need to be fully electric.
    1
  3639. It's not because driving on hydrogen is plain stupid.
    1
  3640. Nah fast charging is good enough already.
    1
  3641.  @jec_ecart  Like I said, inform yourself.
    1
  3642. @ 😂
    1
  3643.  @adofoi30  Yeah it’s shocking that even in 2024 this FUD is still doing the rounds.
    1
  3644. Mooi zo en vervolgens snel opdoeken die hele tent.
    1
  3645. 'And nobody talks about that'. That's because it is mainly not true.
    1
  3646.  @hadang7899  Batteries remain the cleanest option of all alternatives.
    1
  3647. Hydrogen is mindbogglingly inefficient and therefore a stupid solution for cars and heating.
    1
  3648.  @SniQ3  How to say you now nothing about EVs without saying you know nothing about EVs.
    1
  3649.  @SniQ3  Well at least that proves why you know nothing about EVs.
    1
  3650.  @UnrealObject  Fout. Ga je inlezen.
    1
  3651.  @youngmill6  Geldt ook voor jou. Ga je inlezen. Je hoeft geen fan te zijn van Tesla, je moet alleen geen onzin verspreiden.
    1
  3652. Ga je inlezen man
    1
  3653. For a lot of energy actually.
    1
  3654. Even lower than this.
    1
  3655.  @jouko9312  That is not well to wheel.
    1
  3656. Door de veehouderij ja
    1
  3657. Spot on.
    1
  3658.  @aleisterkerkhof9381  Ja man, 10% minder CO2 dan een benzineauto.. vet groot verschil!!
    1
  3659.  @bq5577x  exact dit. De dieselmythe steekt nog altijd hardnekkig te kop op helaas..
    1
  3660. Lol how to say you never tried an EV without saying you never tried an EV.
    1
  3661. You are absolutely clueless.
    1
  3662. Hybrid is not enough. The only way to lower CO2 emissions fast enough is battery electric.
    1
  3663. @ I understand what you mean. But I think charging infrastructure will be expanded much faster than most people think. Fully electric long distance trucking is already possible in large parts of Europe with current charging networks. A lot of charging sites are in development too, even aimed at trucks specifically.
    1
  3664. I suggest you to watch video again.
    1
  3665. Dude it’s 2024
    1
  3666. Air cooled diesel in 2024 😂
    1
  3667. Just buy a used EV for 20k. There is A LOT of choice these days.
    1
  3668. Wishful thinking
    1
  3669. You forgot that you need electricity to make hydrogen and that this conversion will always remain far from 100% efficient.
    1
  3670. anneeq008 I meant that even if you invest heavily in H2 infrastructure it still remains very inefficient.
    1
  3671. anneeq008 ICE efficiency barely improved over the past decades if that is what you mean.
    1
  3672. I Care stop spamming
    1
  3673. I Care lol you just keep copy-pasting the same endless stuff without even mentioning the horribly low efficiency of fuel cell cars.
    1
  3674.  @icare7151  It's simple thermodynamics. A battery electric vehicle will always remain a factor ~3 more efficient. Hydrogen production, compression, transport en conversion in the fuel cell are all steps that involve a lots of energy loss.
    1
  3675. Elektrisch rijden zorgt direct voor minder energieverbruik. Wat doe je met al die spaties en punten trouwens?
    1
  3676.  @willemdederde6669  In de video zit erg veel onzin ja.
    1
  3677.  @willemdederde6669  Het is niet echt iets waar je het oneens over kunt zijn. De video zit boordevol feitelijke onjuistheden. Je kunt hoog of laag springen, maar life cycle-emissies van een EV zijn gewoon significant lager.
    1
  3678. Het idee is ook dat we allemaal veel minder vlees en zuivel gaan consumeren.
    1
  3679.  @martinverbeek8862  Dat lijkt mij ook een prima aanpak. Overigens zag ik onlangs dat sommige plantaardige alternatieven al langzaamaan goedkoper beginnen te worden dan de dierlijke producten. Hopelijk gebeurt dit ook met de zuivelalternatieven.
    1
  3680. Yup they are.
    1
  3681. The whole point of this van is that it is electric.
    1
  3682. Inderdaad!
    1
  3683.  @eddieke4751 Exactly.. how can nobody else mention this?
    1
  3684. No we don't.
    1
  3685. Heeft toch geen effect gelukkig
    1
  3686. Of course not.
    1
  3687.  @VGZ01 schon
    1
  3688. Because the battery only has to be made once - fuel has to be made for every gallon. Electricity is what runs the car. Not the battery.
    1
  3689. El Rey De kabels zitten op slot. Doorknippen zou niet erg snugger zijn wanneer er een paar kW doorheen gaat.
    1
  3690. El Rey Ok maar waarom? Koperdiefstal?
    1
  3691.  @Wilhelmus84Nassau  Lijkt me sterk dat pubers voor de lol speciaal gereedschap gaan aanschaffen.
    1
  3692. They do in fact have a rapidly growing charging network. Look up Ionity.
    1
  3693. They are not dangerous and the compensation point is at about 30.000 miles. What is the problem?
    1
  3694.  @arzemagic  I thought so 😂
    1
  3695.  @arzemagic  Not at all. Fast chargers are easily scalable and apart from that: most EVs charge at night.
    1
  3696. Doesn't really matter. Driving on electricity is a lot more efficient so emissions per kilometer are always lower. Battery production is currently at about 65 kg of CO2 per kWh and this will further decline in the near future.
    1
  3697.  @stripyrex_gaming  1. Shortage in mining capacity of materials (mainly nickel). 2. Engineering the machines that can produce new battery tech in large amounts efficient and fast enough.
    1
  3698. Hahaha hydrogen has been 'around the corner' for decades. It's a dumb technology because it is waaaaay too inefficient and complex compared to batteries. Will never catch up.
    1
  3699. No they are not. Hydrogen is mindbogglingly stupid for passenger cars.
    1
  3700. Nope
    1
  3701. You can’t execute the energy transition overnight.
    1
  3702. Not a single way.
    1
  3703. There is nowhere near enough biogas on earth available to replace all gasoline or diesel.
    1
  3704. EVs have been doing fine for 10+ years in Norway.
    1
  3705. Yea and fuel cells grow on trees..
    1
  3706.  @GTfour01  Melk is voor babykoeien.
    1
  3707.  @joyrider6456  Haha waar heb je het over. Ik denk in het belang van dieren in de veehouderij, in het belang van het milieu en in het belang van de gezondheid van onze bevolking.
    1
  3708. Hydrogen is super inefficient.
    1
  3709. Lars Hemmer Verspreid geen onzin.
    1
  3710.  @Humanmensihsaaninsan  nee
    1
  3711. Yes, sometimes. So what? Still cleaner than diesel.
    1
  3712. Zoek de cijfers anders even op.
    1
  3713. Elon is right though.
    1
  3714.  @MsUltrafox Een elektrische auto is vele malen minder vervuilend dan een vergelijkbaar exemplaar op benzine of diesel. En daarnaast: milieuzones bestaan per definitie om lokale luchtkwaliteit te verbeteren en hebben niets te maken met mondiale CO2-uitstoot.
    1
  3715. ⁠​⁠ @MsUltrafox  Neehoor, na een kilometertje of 40.000 ben je er wel. Life cycle emissions zijn dus vele malen lager. Aan uw andere uitspraken met betrekking tot wind- en zonne-energie en accu’s is af te lezen dat u zich nooit op wetenschappelijk niveau geïnformeerd heeft. Succes.
    1
  3716. The vast majority of road vehicles will be battery electric and yes, quite often they will be charged with nuclear energy.
    1
  3717. RickerdTM En terecht.
    1
  3718. Facts are stranding is very rare
    1
  3719. Yup. People are still so massively misinformed..
    1
  3720. Very simple: leave Tesla
    1
  3721. Not green washing at all. EVs directly contribute to lowering CO2 emissions.
    1
  3722. It was a scam..
    1
  3723. Apparently electric cars pollute the air also! -yes, but far less how much will a full charge cost in future? -hard to say, depending on where and how you charge. Home charging will Always be the cheapest option. Will the companies take advantage of consumers with electric rates? -What do you mean Does a battery car absolutely has to be fully charged? -Of course not. Why do you think so? will governments help? Many countries already provide incentives The ratio between electricity cost and mileage?.....is it cheaper or expensive to use? -A lot cheaper than driving on petrol or diesel. In Europe about half the price per kilometer With petrol cars you can put a minimum of gasoline to get you going for a of few days. Can the same be done with batteries? -yes
    1
  3724. That would only be one of the smaller downsides.
    1
  3725. Uitstekend gesproken.
    1
  3726. Hé een wappie
    1
  3727.  @BrogeKilrain it’s not clean. Both CNG and LNG cause shit loads of CO2.
    1
  3728.  @BrogeKilrain  lol
    1
  3729.  @nunyabidness3075  Clean = low in CO2 emissions
    1
  3730.  @nunyabidness3075  The whole point is that that is simply not true. Solar panels always compensate for their production emissions, even in less sunny parts of the world.
    1
  3731. “Now, you can expect a standard car to last around 12 years or about 200,000 miles. More advanced vehicles like electric cars can go even longer, up to 300,000 miles. Not too long ago, you could expect a car's lifespan to be around eight years and 150,000 miles.” And no, EV drivers do not ‘wait’ for their car to charge. They just sleep in the meantime, or are at work, or are shopping, etc.
    1
  3732.  @twuandixon8675  I am just sharing facts.
    1
  3733. ボロ from EU Dreadfully inefficient.
    1
  3734. Op elektriciteit zit heel veel belasting hoor.
    1
  3735. zucht.
    1
  3736.  @damian246  Als men anno 2024 er in slaagt zo’n compleet ongeïnformeerde en afgezaagde reactie te plaatsen verdient dat niets anders dan een zucht.
    1
  3737. 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
  3738. Nope. Batteries.
    1
  3739. How clueless are you?!
    1
  3740.  @bastiaanstapelberg9018  Alleen al dat je EV’s troep noemt bewijst dat je geen flauw idee hebt waar je over praat.
    1
  3741. Komt in de buurt ja. Waterstof dient daarom enkel te worden ingezet waar batterijen geen optie zijn en ter vervanging van de huidige grijze waterstof.
    1
  3742.  @peterhubek  Forced adoption is not nonsense at all. Lifecycle emissions of EVs are far lower than gasoline or diesel vehicles. There is no such thing as a sweet spot of diversification. It’s very simple: the more EVs, the better. Production emissions are compensated for in only a few years of driving.
    1
  3743. You would need three times the amount of wind and solar to make clean hydrogen in order to fuel an equal amount of FCEV's as EV's.
    1
  3744. Trucks are more difficult to ban soon, so no, they should not. Banning passenger cars is low hanging fruit. By the way, plenty of European cities are already banning ICE trucks.
    1
  3745. These are normal vans.
    1
  3746. Lol
    1
  3747. Because engines will be a thing of the past.
    1
  3748. Weil?
    1
  3749. The whole point is the rush… there is no time to lose.
    1
  3750.  @mvb7780  Alleen de veehouderij hoeft gesloopt te worden.
    1
  3751.  @mvb7780  Gelukkig is daar geen veehouderij voor nodig.
    1
  3752.  @mvb7780  Juist niet. Door te stoppen met veehouderij komt er enorm veel grond beschikbaar dat voor akkerbouw gebruikt kan worden.
    1
  3753.  @jacquelinevanderkooij4301  Aan de veehouderij heel veel.
    1
  3754. Chiel Demmer Waarom kijk je de video niet
    1
  3755. 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
  3756. Of course. EVs drive much better than any ICE car.
    1
  3757. You have clearly no clue. It's just basic physics. Hydrogen cars make no sense and never will.
    1
  3758.  @simon1066  Excellent argument.
    1
  3759.  @simon1066  Fuel cell cars will always remain terribly inefficient due to the losses in production, compression, transport and conversion of hydrogen in the fuel cell. These steps can be improved to a certain degree but never eliminated.
    1
  3760. LOL
    1
  3761.  @Dathumm  Still cheaper than fossil fuels
    1
  3762.  @dblezi  No you won’t.
    1
  3763. Not really. We can eat no, or at least far and far less meat and dairy
    1
  3764. What have you been smoking?
    1
  3765. 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
  3766.  @C_R_O_M________  It's very simple. You are making two famous mistakes. 1. Nobody claims EVs produce 0 CO2. The whole point is they produce far LESS CO2 during their entire lifecycle. There is plenty of research reports to support this. 2. Of course CO2 contributes to greening. But that is not the point. The problem is CO2 ALSO causes the greenhouse effect. You do realize something like CO2 can cause several things at the same time right?!
    1
  3767.  @C_R_O_M________  "0.04% is nothing and one would assume a very high ECS (Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity) to refer to CO2 as a "problem" (which I sincerely don't see, at the end of the day a warmer world is much more hospitable for all life on Earth than a cold one)." Just because you keep repeating this proves that you have not a single clue what you are talking about. Exactly this subject is climate change noob level 1. A 1 minute google search will explain exactly to you why a small increase of CO2 is a huge problem. Good luck.
    1
  3768. Yes sir.
    1
  3769. What is wrong with meat and dairy farmers? Can they not understand what pollution their decisions cause??
    1
  3770. Milieuzones gaan niet om CO2.
    1
  3771. CNG*
    1
  3772.  @Brian-om2hh  🤦🏻‍♂️
    1
  3773. Than what?
    1
  3774. 80% efficient from the electricity generation source...
    1
  3775. ​ @HasanAmmori  Most high voltage power lines are AC. So that is not an average situation. Charge loss over time is neglegible and degradation as well.
    1
  3776.  @HasanAmmori  It seemed like you were referring to transmission. Anyway, electrolysis also requires DC.
    1
  3777. Fuel roads? What?
    1
  3778.  @Gor133  Glow in the dark?
    1
  3779. @D Jaquith, Thorium powerstations are far away, best case scenario is 30 years from now. That is too late so we have to focus on batteries now. Driving on hydrogen is hideously inefficient and this isn't solved by thorium. A small portion of cobalt sources is questionable regarding human ethics. Biggest part (85%) is mined properly, although it may still be invasive for the earth. The good thing is that battery manufacturers are all determined to minimise and finally eleminate cobalt from batteries. Lithium mining is mainly done from brine lakes and is not invasive.
    1
  3780. Also, electrolyzers and fuel cells also require 'rare earth' matels and wear faster than batteries. Plus, fuel cell cars also require (smaller) lithium ion batteries.
    1
  3781. D Jaquith Hydrogen combustion engines will never happen. These are even more inefficient than fuel cells and do emit NOx and make noise.
    1
  3782. D Jaquith Still you could charge three times the amount of battery EV’s with the same amount of energy.
    1
  3783.  @DJaquithFL  I do understand where you are heading to, but I simply don't see the combustion engine surviving the 21st century. When battery technology develops even further so cobalt won't be an issue anymore and massive recycling is on track, there really is zero reasons to look at hydrogen.
    1
  3784. D Jaquith During the past 10 years batteries have been dropping in price big time and this will continue. Also, most EV batteries will outlive the car itself.
    1
  3785. D Jaquith You are talking first gen EV’s. Current generation batteries are temperature controlled and last much longer.
    1
  3786. Haha grapjas 😂
    1
  3787. Hydrogen is a mindbogglingly stupid technology.
    1
  3788.  @kalvds9345  It's the truth.
    1
  3789.  @kalvds9345  Pretty much any kind of vehicle you see driving down on the road will eventually be battery electric. The main draw back of hydrogen is not the lack of refuelling stations but the total lack of efficiency. A battery electric vehicle only requires 1/3rd of the amount of energy to drive.
    1
  3790.  @kalvds9345  Nope, research was based on average CO2 emissions per kWh. It’s easy. There is also plenty of data on battery production emissions. Regarding hydrogen: Lets say average electricity is 450 grams of CO2 per kWh. A hydrogen car consumes about 0,6 kWh per kilometer. That is 270 grams of CO2 per km. A diesel car consuming 1 liter in 20 km produces about 150 grams of CO2 per km.
    1
  3791.  @kalvds9345  I just proved that hydrogen is a dead end road. All vehicles will be battery electric. Good luck waiting for hydrogen.
    1
  3792. Ermm no
    1
  3793. Because it would require a lot of energy. Where would that energy come from?
    1
  3794. Nope
    1
  3795. Zoek anders even op wat de gedachte achter een milieuzone is.
    1
  3796. Even if battery recycling could not be solved for a long time (which is not the case), electric cars are still the best solution by far. Yes, even on non-renewable electricity.
    1
  3797. Well done!
    1
  3798. So what? Combustion engines will eventually be completely gone.
    1
  3799. Nobody said that. It's about efficiency.
    1
  3800. They work fine at night. Where did you get that information?
    1
  3801. Because it is important to focus on the most efficient solutions.
    1
  3802.  @somerandomfella  Not really, even the first EVs were more efficient than petrol engines.
    1
  3803. Huge HP is natural to electric motors. It does not impact range.
    1
  3804. Can be done in most countries. In Norway there wasn’t infrastructure either, it just grew with the number of cars on the road.
    1
  3805. Nee, dit probleem is ontstaan omdat er nergens ter wereld zo veel veeteelt op zo’n klein stukje land bestaat.
    1
  3806. LOL
    1
  3807.  @ChasingDifferentAdventures Yes, even you will eventually own an EV.
    1
  3808.  @ChasingDifferentAdventures  These things only slow down the transition a bit, but won't prevent it from happening. We have no choice anyway.
    1
  3809.  @ChasingDifferentAdventures  🤦🏻‍♂️
    1
  3810. 😂
    1
  3811. Wappie
    1
  3812. Tot en met 2029 kwarttarief.
    1
  3813. The water powered car was never invented.
    1
  3814. HOW are we going to produce enough EXTRA electrical energy (3X more than for EVs) to produce enough hydrogen? And by the way: EVs don't have to charge EVERY night. Do you drive to the gas station every day?
    1
  3815. Jawel hoor. Ook bij dit soort bouwactiviteiten zullen dit soort analyses vooraf worden uitgevoerd.
    1
  3816.  @EthicalGains  Dat is zeker waar.
    1
  3817.  @hersonmartinus7056  We hebben slechts een fractie van de hoeveelheid voedsel nodig wanneer we massaal plantaardig zouden gaan leven. Dat sommige groenten in kassen worden geteeld of van verder weg moeten komen maakt niet uit. De broeikasgasuitstoot zal altijd veel lager zijn. Er zijn overigens tal van gewassen die het prima doen in Nederland buiten de kas: aardappelen, wortels, uien, mais (dat nu voornamelijk voor vee wordt verbouwd!), vele soorten kool, bieten, broccoli, spruiten. En zo zijn er zat Nederlandse seizoensgroenten. Dit geldt ook voor fruit natuurlijk.
    1
  3818.  @davidbrayshaw3529  Last week Elon stated Tesla is currently recycling only about 50 battery packs a week, as “the majority are still in use”.
    1
  3819. It is horribly inefficient...
    1
  3820. lars lochten was het wel
    1
  3821. Battery prices have been decreasing FAST over the past 10 years and this will continue to do so. H2 will always remain about 2 to 3 times as expensive per kilometer because of the horrible efficiency. This will not change simply because of laws of physics. Elon chose batteries because of clear advantages from a technical point of view. Fuel cell vehicles are never going to take over the market simply because current battery tech already makes H2 obsolete regarding range and charging speed.
    1
  3822. More like a couple of decades
    1
  3823. Of course you can, it only impacts range a bit.
    1
  3824. Mooi man 👍🏻
    1
  3825. EVs will most likely become affordable. And the only alternative (oil) is also going to be insanely expensive and obviously no future proof solution at all.
    1
  3826. Not relevant
    1
  3827. Hydrogen will never be considerably more efficient. That is not due to a lack of scale. It is simple physics.
    1
  3828. De veehouderij is niets on trots op te zijn.
    1
  3829. Not bad compared to real meat that is guaranteed not healthy.
    1
  3830.  @timaustin2000  Good point.
    1
  3831. Yeah it’s all a CoNspIrAcyy 😂
    1
  3832. Of course nobody is talking about it, it is a terrible solution.
    1
  3833. There are countless peer reviewed reports freely available that answer all your questions. Long story short: yes, EVs are the right way forward.
    1
  3834. AWKWARD SILENCE
    1
  3835.  @achmahnsch  You have clearly no clue. Hydrogen vehicles require 3 times the amount of electric energy.
    1
  3836.  @achmahnsch  Again, you have clearly no clue. Batteries only have to be produced once and then the EV is super efficient its entire life. A hydrogen car is inefficient every single day. Hydrogen cars also require lithium, cobalt, nickel and platinum.
    1
  3837. What energy source would you use for splitting the water?
    1
  3838. It's not! They both start with the same electricity....
    1
  3839. Definitely 😂 He makes a decent income from Youtube videos about EV FUD.
    1
  3840. Yeah but very relevant
    1
  3841.  @jorankoopman1899  Jawel.
    1
  3842. Youtube: how American do you want your next video to be? Me: yes.
    1
  3843. Before gas is in your tank it went through MANY steps involving a lot of emissions. Driving electric is always cleaner.
    1
  3844. Onzin. De veehouderij moet zo snel mogelijk worden verkleind. Zowel in Nederland als in het buitenland. Vanzelfsprekend moeten we ook minder dierlijke eiwitten gaan consumeren. En het bevolkingsargument is natuurlijk een zinloos argument want dat geldt voor letterlijk alles.
    1
  3845.  @RolandTerwisga  uw voedselkeuze heeft veel invloed op het milieu en dierenwelzijn. Het zou daarom helemaal niet gek zijn om die keuze te beperken.
    1
  3846.  @RolandTerwisga  Uiteraard is dat niet aan mij, maar wel aan de overheid. Verder is het duidelijk dat u zich nooit fatsoenlijk geïnformeerd heeft over de CO2-uitstoot van voedsel, want transport maakt maar een klein gedeelte uit van de totale emissies. Zo kan het zijn dat plantaardig voedsel dat uit het buitenland komt minder belastend is voor het klimaat dan dierlijke producten uit Nederland.
    1
  3847.  @RolandTerwisga  Nogmaals, u heeft zich niet verdiept in het wetenschappelijk onderzoek. Los daarvan: een plantaardig dieet is niet automatisch verbonden met producten van de andere kant van de wereld. Je kunt probleemloos én plantaardig én lokaal eten.
    1
  3848.  @RolandTerwisga  Fout. Juist bij een plantaardig dieet is er veel minder land nodig. Zoals je ongetwijfeld weet is veehouderij ontzettend inefficient en wordt 40% van alle Nederlandse akkerbouwgrond gebruikt voor het telen van vervoer. Direct plantaardig voedsel eten is veel efficiënter en daardoor is er minder land nodig.
    1
  3849. Es ist einfach viel nachhaltigER als Diesel.
    1
  3850. Hydrogen cars have batteries too plus a fuel cell and fuel tanks. All require manufacturing and recycling.
    1
  3851. Achja, elke twee uur even een half uur pauze is toch niet zo'n ramp. Als je in de ochtend met een volle accu begint kun je 600 kilometer in 7 a 8 uurtjes afleggen.
    1
  3852. Jouni Airplane Video's Met de goedkoopste Tesla (Model 3 SR+) kun je 1000 km in 10,5 uur afleggen inclusief laden.
    1
  3853. Jouni Airplane Video's Ja
    1
  3854. Lets say all the sreens and the electronics behind it consume 500 watts. That would be 0.5 kWh per hour of driving. That's less than 3 kilometers of range!
    1
  3855. Brilliant
    1
  3856. Gaat gewoon digitaal bijgehouden worden. Het gaat om de kilometers die je binnen Nederland rijdt. Voor buitenlanders zijn er verschillende oplossingen: stickertje op de voorruit, digitale kentekenregistratie, genoeg voorbeelden in andere Europese landen.
    1
  3857. Emissions caused by battery production only happen once. Currently about 100 kg of CO2 per kWh. Driving on dirty electricity is still cleaner than driving on petrol or diesel. Making and using hydrogen is super ineffcient, so you need a lot more of that same dirty energy to drive a certain distance with a FCEV. Also, materials for fuel cells and electrolysers also have to be mined and they degradee rather fast. FCEV's also have lithium ion batteries.
    1
  3858. Lol terrible argumentation again. Obviously on street charging is the solution and just because ‘there aren’t many of them yet’ is not a reason it won’t work. On street charging has been a thing in countless European cities for over a decade now and is working fantastic. This will be the case all over the world.
    1
  3859. You don’t realise how devastating meat and dairy production is?
    1
  3860. Sure, but it is a million times better than continuing with animal meat.
    1
  3861. Forze Delft Rijden op waterstof is een gepasseerd station.
    1
  3862.  @gavinchilunlam2476  you are stuck in 2018
    1
  3863.  @viewer_5714  what exactly?
    1
  3864. Yeah lets just sit around and wait for some miraculous invention to come to market and save us all.
    1
  3865. cryomind Nope.
    1
  3866. Early Tesla Model S and Nissan Leaf models (from around 2012) are doing just fine and current technology will do even better. And you can easily leave your EV parked for a few months.
    1
  3867.  @alileevil  Correct, but the gasoline car would have caused many times more CO2 over the same amount of years - and that is what this obviously is all about. And we have left the fan-boy era behind us for many years already. People from all sorts of backgrounds are driving EVs these days, simply because they make so much sense.
    1
  3868.  @alileevil  100% coal electricity is very rare, but even in that case the EV is less polluting.
    1
  3869. Lol. Just wrong. Current battery tech lasts much longer. Fuel cells wear out much faster.
    1
  3870. Yes it is theoretically possible, but VERY inefficient energy wise.
    1
  3871. It's not a scam. Electric is always cleaner.
    1
  3872. Not necessary. Driving electric is always cleaner. Don’t wait.
    1
  3873.  @jasonthomas369  Yes it is. Plenty of research available these days.
    1
  3874. Not a concern. Batteries will outlast the vehicle.
    1
  3875. No they can’t because of weight and cost. The range it has is plenty.
    1
  3876. Hydrogen is not a source of energy.
    1
  3877. Gelukkig wel ja!
    1
  3878.  @hondaspeed6785  ruim 20% van alle Duitse stroom komt van windturbines, dus draaien doen ze regelmatig.
    1
  3879.  @hondaspeed6785  lees nog een keer
    1
  3880. If you had educated yourself you would know that driving electric is always less polluting even on 100% fossil electricity.
    1
  3881. Just because you don’t like something doesn’t mean it is bogus.
    1
  3882. You can’t skip thermodynamics with money and research. EVs can be charged much more efficiently during low demand. The Tesla Model S already does more than 500 km. Extracting lithium is done by evaporation from brine lakes. Not very invasive at all.
    1
  3883. Not really.. It's poorly executed propaganda for big oil.
    1
  3884. Air
    1
  3885. Not true. Electric cars do in fact contribute significantly to lowering CO2 emissions.
    1
  3886. Where did you get that information?
    1
  3887. Steve Awesome It is the future and eventually everyone will drive an EV. It’s not a niche. They are much more efficient so a lot of fossil fuel will be saved. Battery production is not a disaster. It’s simple as that.
    1
  3888.  @rezadiamond3720  je roept maar wat
    1
  3889. Trotzdem kann mann billiger fahren als mit Benzin.
    1
  3890. It's the other way around... An EV is ALWAYS cleaner in the long run than any ICE car.
    1
  3891.  @uncommonlogic1698  Of course I did. EVs are always cleaner. Look it up. Electricity comes from a variety of sources. But that doesn't really matter. An EV wins when it comes to CO2 emissions.
    1
  3892. Iedereen die iets van de diensten van Meta gebruikt heeft iets aan die data centres.
    1
  3893. 🤦🏻‍♂️
    1
  3894. In Europe charging infrastructure has been changing really quickly over the last few years. Should be possible in the USA too.
    1
  3895.  @JohnDoesDrones  Tesla is planning to open up their super chargers in the future to all EVs. They already did so in Europe and this works well. Again, I am convinced charging in general will get better in the USA as well. Selling kilowatt-hours is a profitable business and the number of EVs is growing quickly.
    1
  3896. Not really
    1
  3897. We also need loads of batteries for public transportation.
    1
  3898. Oke wappie
    1
  3899. Juist 👍🏻
    1
  3900. Nee, de discussie gaat over lokale emissies zoals roet en fijnstof veroorzaakt door houtkachels. Dat heeft niets met klimaat te maken.
    1
  3901. they are super cheap to run and maintain.
    1
  3902. Yeah, I am also not understanding the whole dehumidifying problem.
    1
  3903.  @MyGoogleYoutube  I see, that could be a possibility.  Yes, I also miss the technical side of the story.
    1
  3904. wrong
    1
  3905. Foute beredenering. Doordat de aarde opwarmt als gevolg van fossiele CO2 komt er meer waterdamp in de atmosfeer.
    1
  3906. And eventually China will start closing farms too, resulting in a better world.
    1
  3907.  @AhmadSyarif92  It’s a pretty weak argument. If governments want to get rid of a certain industry, they will. It just takes time.
    1
  3908. Wat is je bron voor tientallen jaren? Dat klinkt namelijk erg veel.
    1
  3909. Rijden op waterstof is een vrij slechte oplossing voor het klimaatprobleem. Deze pompstationhouder had zich hij beter eerst fatsoenlijk in de materie kunnen verdiepen voordat hij hier aan begon.
    1
  3910. Bye eFuel.
    1
  3911.  @ben_6199  yup
    1
  3912.  @ABa-os6wm  yup :(
    1
  3913.  @lesliespeaker668  Well said.
    1
  3914. Er komen echt wel financiele maatregelen om iedereen te helpen. In het ergste geval moet je gewoon je bestaande ketel laten oplappen en kun je nog een paar jaar door. Een warmtepomp is immers alleen verplicht bij vervanging.
    1
  3915. That would be considered perpetual motion and is not possible.
    1
  3916. Gewoon even naar een snellader. Niks aan de hand.
    1
  3917.  @ikik3406  Een kwartiertje is waarschijnlijk genoeg aangezien je vast niet naar de andere kant van het land moet.
    1
  3918.  @ikik3406  Je bent toch geen ambulance?
    1
  3919.  @ikik3406  De kans is en blijft gewoon klein dat je net op dat moment lang moet opladen. Die paar minuten maken dan ook niet zo veel meer uit. Voor hetzelfde geld sta je in de rij bij het tankstation.
    1
  3920. @ Ik kan me dat zeker voorstellen. Mijn punt is gewoon dat het verschil meestal veel kleiner zal zijn dan je denkt. In de tussentijd rijden hulpdiensten zoals politie en ANWB ook al jaren probleemloos rond in elektrische auto’s.
    1
  3921. @ Waarom zou ik daar over liegen?
    1
  3922. Ik ben helemaal klaar met de veehouderij. Opdoeken die handel.
    1
  3923. Charging EVs for example...
    1
  3924. busybody1 Ever heard of power lines?
    1
  3925. busybody1 I actually do and hydrogen is stupid and a waste of energy.
    1
  3926. Synthetic fuels are horribly inefficient so of course the EV would remain the cleanest.
    1
  3927. Okay lets do the math. An electric heater in a car uses about 2 kW in cold conditions. Let's say the battery of a total capacity of 50 kWh has only 20 % left at the beginning of the traffic jam. That means 10 kWh. In a bad scenario the traffic jam lasts 2 hours so after that you still have 6 kWh in the battery for AT LEAST 20 miles of driving. Nothing to worry about.
    1
  3928. 😂
    1
  3929.  @2wheelhooligan649  😂
    1
  3930.  @ajax818  This.
    1
  3931. Incorrect
    1
  3932.  @graemewindley1614  Why do you think electric cars don’t work?
    1
  3933. Well more subsidies for EV manufacturing is a great idea.
    1
  3934. No other option though
    1
  3935. 'hydrogen fuel cell' is not an energy source whatsoever.
    1
  3936. Yes EVs are far more sustainable than cars with combustion engines.
    1
  3937. @Oldschool-q4g goed verhaal
    1
  3938. And spending it well on EV infrastructure which is great.
    1
  3939. Correct
    1
  3940.  @palmshoot  Electrons are also inexhaustible. You are making the wrong comparison. It should be: batteries vs. fuel cells + tanks and hydrogen vs. electrons.
    1
  3941. Except that in this case there is no time to lose.
    1
  3942. Electric cars are always the cleanest option. Yes, even on non renewable energy.
    1
  3943. Battery power is and remains the future.
    1
  3944.  @milanondrak5564  So much misinformation...
    1
  3945. Hybrids were cool 10 - 20 years ago
    1
  3946.  @bulancez  I don’t see a problem in having a 30 minute break after 200 miles of driving. Much rather than hauling around a combustion engine.
    1
  3947. You mean, after 10 to 15 years. Current batteries last a looooong time. Recycling is being prepared for, look up Redwood Materials.
    1
  3948. Physics don’t lie
    1
  3949. Both combustion engines and animal agriculture need to be banned as soon as possible. Electric cars make a pretty big dent in CO2 emissions.
    1
  3950.  @radiofun232  fout
    1
  3951.  @radiofun232  onzin, daar zijn we al jaren.
    1
  3952.  @radiofun232  bij ‘betere accutechnologie’. Er is letterlijk 0 reden om te wachten op een of andere toekomstige technologie. De huidige EVs zijn uitstekend.
    1
  3953. oh you don't really 'find' it greener. okay lol
    1
  3954. Not necessary. EVs always make sense.
    1
  3955. Has been tried in the past by the company Better Place (look it up on wikipedia). The problem is that battery swapping infrastructure is A LOT more expensive than fast charging infrastructure. Also, fast charging is already so fast that it wont justify paying more for a swap.
    1
  3956. They are much more efficient than hydrogen cars.
    1
  3957.  @JHBH70  It’s just simple physics, but here is a nice chart that says it all: https://cleantechnica.com/2021/02/01/chart-why-battery-electric-vehicles-beat-hydrogen-electric-vehicles-without-breaking-a-sweat/amp/
    1
  3958.  @JHBH70  That doesn’t change anything about the efficiency. Hydrogen cars will always require MUCH more electricity, no matter the investments. EVs are here to stay.
    1
  3959. Yup.
    1
  3960. You don't need to dump it.
    1
  3961.  @michaelvanallen6400  Genau. Danke!
    1
  3962. Nope. Electric vehicles are far less polluting.
    1
  3963.  @HotRodDave  No need for guessing. Plenty of data freely available. EV lifecycle carbon emissions are always lower.
    1
  3964. Yes, asap please
    1
  3965. Unfortunately true
    1
  3966. But you need three times the amount of solar panels buddy.
    1
  3967. Not all. There are plenty of out of warranty EVs on the market and people buy them.
    1
  3968. Not really. Hydrogen will only play a tiny role in vehicles.
    1
  3969.  @mantas1906  Also the majority of lorries and busses will be battery electric. Simply because it is far more efficient and therefore a lot cheaper per mile.
    1
  3970. How old are you?
    1
  3971.  @B0BA-F3TT  In that case you will definitely be driving an EV in you life.
    1
  3972.  @andrevdende8244  u bent niet in de realiteit geïnteresseerd zo te zien
    1
  3973.  @johnandersen-p7q  exactly
    1
  3974. R. En jij dacht dat brandstofcellen gewoon uit de lucht komen vallen.
    1
  3975. Uitstekend verwoord 👍🏻
    1
  3976. Nope
    1
  3977. First, turn your caps lock off idiot. Secondly, driving electric is the least polluting way to transport goods and people. Nobody claims it is 100% unharmful. It simply is the best way to do it.
    1
  3978. It never will. Thankfully.
    1
  3979. Aviation accounts for only 8% of global oil consumption. Big oil might not go away, but will definitely get A LOT less big if aviation is the only remaining consumer.
    1
  3980.  @cb-cowboy3947  Danke und das wird natürlich kommen.
    1
  3981. You mean hydrogen. Well because it is inefficient.
    1
  3982. Has been tried before. It turned out to be not economically viable enough compared to fast charging.
    1
  3983. Lol
    1
  3984. In your dreams.
    1
  3985.  @vikingking6477 Diesel car sales are not going up.
    1
  3986.  @kabysummit5801  exactly
    1
  3987. Even if that becomes the case, it still is utterly useless to use hydrogen as a vehicle fuel.
    1
  3988. Yup it is mind-boggling.
    1
  3989.  @dakshitchhadwa2454  I hope so too.
    1
  3990. It’s not. You thought that materials needed for fuel cells grow on trees?
    1
  3991. It is possible, but not right now.
    1
  3992. Lol
    1
  3993. 50 MPG yeah sure
    1
  3994. Correct but we must also massively reduce burning fossil fuels. If we continue with it, we will not be fine.
    1
  3995.  @Albert24346  Well consumers and companies will always choose the cheapest option and then batteries will clearly win.
    1
  3996. Of course curbside charging is possible. This happens all over Europe.
    1
  3997.  @bluceree7312  It’s expanding a lot where I live. Works great.
    1
  3998. They are not.
    1
  3999. You would be surprised that hydrogen stations are not capable at all of servicing many vehicles after another. Re-pressurisation can take up to 10 minutes in between every three cars and many FCEV owners have to deal with nozzles frozen to their vehicles, waiting for it to warm up again in order to take it off.
    1
  4000. But it is the LEAST polluting option. Also: lithium availability is not a concern at all.
    1
  4001.  @susilpal8398  Correct, but it is wrong to state that 'there is not much lithium on earth'. There is more than enough. Also: hydrogen fuel cells last about 10 years and then need replacement including the whole high pressure system and tanks. A hydrogen car requires three times as many solar panels as an EV.
    1
  4002. 😂😂 yeah sure
    1
  4003. Lol what about CO2
    1
  4004.  @jayecurry1369  You have a lot of catching up to do.
    1
  4005. 1. Fast charging efficiencies are often well above 90%: https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/publication/evaluation-fast-charging-efficiency-under-extreme-temperatures 2. Battery electric vehicles mostly rely on slow charging for the biggest part, although trucks will probably use fast charging more often. Nevertheless, the trucks will probably also be charged during the night so maybe only half the charging will be done at fast chargers. 3. Hydrogen refilling is always very inefficient, every time you do it, no matter what. Charging a BEV is most of the time very efficient, and in some cases a bit less efficient.
    1
  4006. Germany and The Netherlands are among the countries with the best charging infrastructure so you clearly did something wrong or used an outdated EV.
    1
  4007. Good to hear this. Thank you.
    1
  4008. Unlikely. Driving on hydrogen will always remain far more expensive due to its very low efficiency. In daily life you do not wait for your car to charge because it happens at night or when you are at work 9 times out of 10.
    1
  4009. Quick charging is not a daily activity. Most EV owners charge during the night 90% of the time.
    1
  4010. Your anecdote proves literally nothing. Combustion engine exhaust is simply unhealthy, no matter how you spin it. EVs are a huge improvement for the world in many ways.
    1
  4011. Wordt gewoon verboden hoor.
    1
  4012. There is one big difference: pollutants from petrolium products go up in the sky. Batteries are just here to stay, so the waste stream is much easier to keep in control. And no, battery waste is not worse than a car's lifetime emissions.
    1
  4013. All the lower impact of raw material extraction saved by the fuel cell option is compensated by having to build 3 times as many wind turbines and solar panels. It doesn’t make sense.
    1
  4014. Guess where heat pumps have been popular for decades. Scandinavian countries.
    1
  4015. Haha well put
    1
  4016. Wrong. It is perfectly solvable. More transmission capacity + batteries + dynamic EV charging will fix it and this is currently happening all over Europe including Germany.
    1
  4017. Wrong
    1
  4018.  @SkullBanker-68  MGUY is not a reliable source at all. Also, 200 pounds of copper is something completely different than 200 tons of fossil fuel.
    1
  4019. It's sad to see they serve dairy milk in these Japanese schools.
    1
  4020. As we all know, EV total life cycle emissions are far lower than any comparable gasoline vehicle. So yes, buying an EV in stead of a gasoline car is in fact better for the environment.
    1
  4021. That is why incentives are so important.
    1
  4022. It's not ironic at all because you are wrong and you probably know that. You just feel unconfortable with change.
    1
  4023.  @monocogenit1  thanks
    1
  4024.  @kenw.4539 Where did you hear this?
    1
  4025. Jij wou zeggen dat je voor minder dan 4 cent per kilometer rijdt met je benzinebak?
    1
  4026. Wrong.
    1
  4027. Zeker. Elektrificatie van zo’n beetje alles is essentieel om verdere opwarming van de aarde tegen te gaan. Doorgaan met het verbranden van fossiele brandstoffen zou heel dom zijn.
    1
  4028. "Neuerdings höre ich immer öfter" Das ist dein Problem. Es gibt viele Vorschungsberichten womit sie sich ordentlich informieren können statt einfach da von aus gehen das es sich wieder um ein Verschwörungstheorie handelt.
    1
  4029. @I G Yup
    1
  4030.  @renzelpounch  Je vergeet dat een enorm groot gedeelte van de akkerbouw bestaat voor het produceren van veevoer (40%).
    1
  4031. No you should not because hydrogen is made with the exact same electricity.
    1
  4032.  @ShenZhouGaiacoin  You are mixing things up. You should not compare hydrogen to the batteries. Hydrogen is the medium, not the storage device. EVs can be charged with renewable electricity as well and that would only require 1/3rd of the amount of energy compared to a hydrogen car.
    1
  4033. Recycling of course.
    1
  4034. Allemaal geneuzel. Het zijn de lifecycle-emissies die tellen en die zijn bij een EV gewoon beduidend lager.
    1
  4035.  @radiofun232  Ja, en dat is precies waar u de mist in gaat. U roept maar wat zonder eerst wetenschappelijke publicaties er op na te slaan.
    1
  4036. @ Google: life cycle emissions EV en u vindt vele
    1
  4037. Synthetic fuels and hydrogen produce far more CO2 due to their super low efficiency than battery production causes.
    1
  4038. Recycling.
    1
  4039. Daan Nee, dat doen ze niet. Verspreid geen onzin.
    1
  4040. Wim vanD Nee, dat is een bekend en hardnekkig misverstand. Elektrisch rijden is altijd schoner, zelfs met de grijste grijze stroom die je kunt vinden.
    1
  4041. Stop met onzin verspreiden van en hou je bij de feiten. Bovendien: milieuzones gaan om lokale luchtkwaliteit.
    1
  4042. Not true at all. Internal combustion engines require many times more raw materials during their life due to terribly low efficiencies.
    1
  4043.  @AORD72  Exactly.
    1
  4044. FCV will have to remain a niche because energy consumption is simply unacceptably high.
    1
  4045. Public chargers at parkings for overnight charging.
    1
  4046. There is no need for combustion engines if you can charge every few hours.
    1
  4047. You have no clue. mr. Meyer was a famous fraudster.
    1
  4048. You have not follwed developments of EV's over the past 10 years?
    1
  4049. You are wrong. We are already far past that point. Battery electric is already here and here to stay. Countless public parking spots have already been equipped with over night chargers in many countries and fast charging is a non issue these days.
    1
  4050. Waar zie je dat precies?
    1
  4051. Probably scale down and change of activities.
    1
  4052. Burning hydrogen is a massive waste.
    1
  4053. It's not. Availability of lithium is not a problem. Batteries will be reused and eventually recycled.
    1
  4054.  @Chopper153  Very unlikely. Even if there will ever be large amounts of renewables hydrogen remains a very inefficient and utterly complex system to store energy for vehicles. By that time batteries will be even better than now and a lot cheaper.
    1
  4055. What are you talking about? EVs work great in freezing conditions.
    1
  4056.  @skiran69  Yes they do.
    1
  4057.  @SteelBelted  That is no problem at all.
    1
  4058.  @SteelBelted  You will first have to explain what exactly you are thinking happens to an EV battery in cold weather.
    1
  4059.  @SteelBelted  EVs have been charging successfully in freezing temperatures for almost a decade all around the world. You don’t have to thaw your car manually. Battery packs are temperature controlled. This is an automatic process.
    1
  4060.  @SteelBelted  They are getting more affordable every year, so it's just a matter of time. Batteries can be recycled for the biggest part which is A LOT better than exhaust gasses that can never be retrieved and the fossil fuels that can only be burned once.
    1
  4061.  @SteelBelted  Yeah algal diesel is interesting. Could definitely play a role in industries in which electrification is not an option within the next few decades, like aviation.
    1
  4062. Excellent idea.
    1
  4063.  @truebrit3670  Nitrous oxide*
    1
  4064. Lol!
    1
  4065. Hybrids were cool 20 years ago. But they are definitely not the future with the dropping battery prices and the much more simplistic and almost maintenance free electric drivetrains.
    1
  4066. Niet echt, in Nederland is extreem veel veeteelt op een klein stuk land.
    1
  4067. Still insanely inefficient and it threatens land use for food stock. Not an option at all.
    1
  4068. Exactly. It is unbelievably stupid.
    1
  4069. Wat CO2-uitstoot heb je gelijk dat het niet uitmaakt waar de fabriek staat. Maar als kijkt naar stoffen die schadelijk zijn voor de gezondheid dan zijn we wel degelijk beter af wanneer staalfabrieken zo veel mogelijk in dunbevolkte gebieden staan.
    1
  4070. Not a scam at all.
    1
  4071. Not at all
    1
  4072. 😂😂
    1
  4073. In the automotive world it is normal to only talk about the tailpipe emissions, same for ICE vehicles. So it is correct.
    1
  4074. Het is inderdaad te hopen dat het plan om de veestapel te halveren werkelijkheid wordt en dat de regering zich niet laat beinvloeden door de kortzichtige boeren met hun trekkertjes.
    1
  4075. Heb je je ooit verdiept in de milieuverpestende praktijken van de olie- en gasindustrie?
    1
  4076.  @fest6754  Nee jo, veel te inefficiënt.
    1
  4077. LOL
    1
  4078. Yes, but takes insane amounts of time. So no, we should not wait for that. Electrification of road transport has a huge priority.
    1
  4079. Preetam Mukherjee So you are concerned about availability of electricity in certain areas and then you start about fuel cell cars. They require three times the amount of that exact same electric energy...
    1
  4080. Preetam Mukherjee So you are concerned about power peaks, not energy. This can easily be solved by smart chargers.
    1
  4081. Preetam Mukherjee Nope it won’t. HFCVs will always remain less attractive both economical and energy efficiency wise. It is just simple physics. Also, every parking spot can be equipped with a slow charger. No problem for apartment buildings.
    1
  4082. Preetam Mukherjee Sure, but it is ignorant to assume that in the future laws of physics will miraculously be broken. Because that is what you would need to make HFCVs more efficient than BEVs. Fuel cells require platinum that has to be mined by the way.
    1
  4083. No, they did it correct. Here is a nice chart: https://cleantechnica.com/2021/02/01/chart-why-battery-electric-vehicles-beat-hydrogen-electric-vehicles-without-breaking-a-sweat/
    1
  4084. Because they both start with the same electricity.....
    1
  4085. recycling...
    1
  4086.  @musti61  Er nu al zat tweedehands elektrische auto's beschikbaar en over een paar jaar nog veel meer.
    1
  4087.  @musti61  Uiteraard geen hybride. Een eerste generatie Nissan Leaf en Renault Zoe kun je voor onder de 10.000 vinden. Die komen niet zo ver, maar dit is voor vervoer in en rond de stad natuurlijk geen probleem. Wil je wat meer actieradius dan kun je voor tegen de 20.000 euro een leuke BMW i3 of Hyundai Ioniq vinden.
    1
  4088.  @daffymore  Andersom bedoel je?
    1
  4089.  @warwolf0  It’s creating CO2 by making hydrogen.
    1
  4090.  @warwolf0  The electric grid will do just fine. It's a myth.
    1
  4091.  @warwolf0  Correct. Average charging habits don't add much to the grid load. Most EVs charge at night and only require about 10 kWh per day for an average daily commute. Spread over 12 hours of charging that is less than one 1 kW of charging power.
    1
  4092.  @warwolf0  6 AC chargers is something completely different than 6 superchargers. The energy consumed when nog charging is negligible. The grid will cope. Read this: https://energynews.us/2021/03/10/commentary-yes-our-electricity-grid-can-support-an-electric-vehicle-future/
    1
  4093.  @julianbonskilzz  Het kost circa drie keer zo veel elektriciteit om waterstof te genereren.
    1
  4094.  @nickk.9914  Waterstofauto's zijn voorzien van behoorlijke lithium-ionaccu's en de brandstofcel zelf bevat ook zeldzame metalen, als dat is wat je met afval bedoelt.
    1
  4095. Depends on where you live. Many countries have great charging infrastructure already.
    1
  4096. lol nope.
    1
  4097. 1:09 That is The Netherlands NOT Norway.
    1
  4098. Akkerbouw ja, veeteelt is echter compleet nutteloos.
    1
  4099. Boefje de Wolf Het is totaal niet goedkoop 😂
    1
  4100. The Chinese make insane developments regarding quality these days. And don't forget, they have to comply to European safety and quality standards before they can sell vehicles here. As long as the quality is acceptable for most customers and the price is much lower, the German car industry has plenty of reasons to be scared.
    1
  4101. lol
    1
  4102. Less animal harm, emissions and land use.
    1
  4103. Aqw aq Jij snapt het.
    1
  4104. Gaat gewoon gebeuren hoor.
    1
  4105. Anna Jager Dan heb jij duidelijk geen verstand van elektrische auto’s.
    1
  4106. Anna Jager Een diesel is veel vervuilender dan een elektrische auto.
    1
  4107.  @annajager6094  ?
    1
  4108. Haha there it is again.. the one and only famous Stanley Mayer scam 😂
    1
  4109. Wrong. Battery production emissions are only 100 kg of CO2 per kWh so this is quickly compensated for as soon as you start driving.
    1
  4110. Wappie zijn is een keuze hè Piet
    1
  4111. 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
  4112. 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
  4113. 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
  4114. Hou toch op met die onzin.
    1
  4115. Arie Veloo Kan prima hoor, dat soort hoogspanningsverbinding bestaan al langer tussen bijvoorbeeld Noorwegen en Nederland. En verder ben ik niet per se voorstander van energie uit Afrika hier gebruiken, maar ik zeg alleen dat waterstof een dom idee is.
    1
  4116. MrPatriickzz wat roep je allemaal man, ik begon niet over Afrika..
    1
  4117. MrPatriickzz Ik BEGON niet over Afrika
    1
  4118. Still very inefficient.
    1
  4119.  @fglatzel  Compared to battery electric. Making hydrogen at home is also very inefficient...
    1
  4120.  @fglatzel  Nothing is free. You will have to buy 3 times as many solar panels first plus an electrolyzer system, compressor and storage vessels.
    1
  4121. Not at all. Hydrogen is stupid.
    1
  4122. Milan Swoboda Fantastic explanation 👌🏻
    1
  4123. why?
    1
  4124.  @MickR0sco EVs are even easier. You won't have to even fill up 9 times out of 10 because you charge when you sleep. Current EV's can go hundres of kilometers on a full charge if you really have to and after these hours you need a break anyway. Fast charging often takes only less than half an hour. And that at only a fraction of the cost and CO2 emissions of petrol or hydrogen.
    1
  4125. Everything will be electric in the long run so we need capable grids anyway.
    1
  4126.  @ekahab  Life cycle analysis research
    1
  4127.  @remkovdb  Met de enorme groei van elektrische auto's en warmtepompen in de nabije toekomst zullen overschotten minder voorkomen.
    1
  4128. Lol you clearly never ever informed yourself properly. Spreading this heap of misinformation in 2020 is simply funny.
    1
  4129. Hydrogen in combustion engines is even more inefficient.
    1
  4130.  @amerchioles1113  I see. Probably a lot easier and cheaper to convert to bio gas (methane).
    1
  4131. Except that the video above is utter bullshit.
    1
  4132. Wat dacht je van luchtvervuiling. Stel je voor he, dat we straks allemaal gewoon schone lucht in kunnen ademen.
    1
  4133. Emissions would still be too high. We need to stop with fossil fuels.
    1
  4134.  @cambuurleeuwarden  Klassiek voorbeeldje whataboutism.
    1
  4135.  @thomaswesenaar7029  Precies!
    1
  4136. Which eventually results in lower cost per car and a lot of used cars.
    1
  4137. Oh yes absolutely. EVs are much better. Diesel and gasoline are so horribly inefficient that it is quite easy for battery tech to cause much less pollution.
    1
  4138.  @HarrisonAdAstra  Well said. The $2 hydrogen story is a myth.
    1
  4139. synthetic oils are still made from crude
    1
  4140. wrong
    1
  4141. Why do you think this is not happening? The market for electric busses is growing massively.
    1
  4142. Also you will be driving an EV.
    1
  4143. Wrong. Hydrogen is horribly inefficient.
    1
  4144. It's not. Hydrogen fuelled combustion engines are so terribly inefficient that they are far worse for the environment than battery electric trucks and their production emissions.
    1
  4145. Incorrect. Inform yourself.
    1
  4146. @Wiggeltje Woepie Waar je in gelooft moet je lekker zelf weten, maar gebruik dit niet als reden om het leven van andere planeetbewoners te verkloten.
    1
  4147. @Wiggeltje Woepie En wat precies hebben die dieren verkeerd gedaan?
    1
  4148. @Wiggeltje Woepie lache man
    1
  4149. Yeah but this is very unlikely
    1
  4150. Haha, ik dacht eerst even dat je het serieus bedoelde. Mooie satire man!
    1
  4151. Nope
    1
  4152. Nope
    1
  4153. A few governments like the idea, but that's only because they have no clue. Taxing can be done in various different ways.
    1
  4154. Omdat er wel enorm veel vervuiling (juist stikstof) in Nederland is en omdat we een goed ontwikkeld land zijn en dus de middelen hebben om er wat aan te doen. Dat doen andere landen ook op het gebied van milieuprolemen.
    1
  4155.  @christianamor8828  Als het allemaal een beetje te ingewikkeld wordt dan betekent dit opeens dat het 'een leugen' is?
    1
  4156. It doesn’t get to much more than 30%
    1
  4157.  @maxtorque2277 Great comment!
    1
  4158.  @davycayaux2566  grapjas
    1
  4159. Lower CO2 emissions, no local emissions, very quiet, much more power, modern safety equipment, and yes, most things on this van you can repair yourself. Also: chances of technical problems is far lower in general.
    1
  4160.  @andrewallen9993 Nope, that's a common misconception. EVs are always less polluting, even if non-renewable energy is used. Power stations and distribution is far more efficient than petroleum refinement, transport and individuel combustion. Again, EVs rarely break down and you can replace all conventional parts like suspension, brakes, steering rack, driveshafts like you are used to. The electric motor will likely outlast the rest of the vehicle. Yes, the battery pack will eventually (15+ years) require overhaul / replacement but there will be plenty of third parties to help you out with this.
    1
  4161.  @andrewallen9993  Phone batteries are absolutely incomparable.
    1
  4162.  @andrewallen9993  Phones do not have battery cooling and heating systems.
    1
  4163.  @andrewallen9993 Fans in laptops are for cooling the CPU and such. If you had done some research you would have known that EV batteries easily last 10 years, and current generations are expected to last even longer.
    1
  4164.  @andrewallen9993 Guess what, the Leafs didn't have a thermal management system! Do you get it now? Solar power is great by the way.
    1
  4165. Lithium ion batteries can be recycled. Look up Redwood Materials.
    1
  4166. Klopt. Goed verwoord. De veehouderij moet drastisch verkleind worden.
    1
  4167. Emissions of EVs are a lot lower. So yes, they are in fact a lot less harmful. Is it better to buy a bicycle or take the train? Sure, but nobody would deny that. The point is, if you really must buy a new car, it should preferably be electric.
    1
  4168. Because it doesn't really matter. EVs are always the cleanest option and they get cleaner every year.
    1
  4169.  @Luke-id1cp  Will be a combination of natural gas, coal, nuclear, wind and solar power. You should realise that oil and gas refineries consume A LOT of power, so this will decrease over the years.
    1
  4170.  @ayushk4099  Yes it will. The average life of an ICE car is 12 years.
    1
  4171.  @ayushk4099  Hard to say. Could be. Battery packs can by fixed on cell level.
    1
  4172. Very inefficient.
    1
  4173. There is no infrastructure. The only thing you can reuse of a petrol station is the shop. Hydrogen remains horribly inefficient and thus slows down the energy transition.
    1
  4174. BEVs will be so much better within 10 years that hydrogen absolutely makes no sense anymore (they already don’t).
    1
  4175. You need A LOT more ships to move your petroleum products around the globe to keep your car running its entire lifetime than you need to make a single battery pack only once. Electric makes a lot of sense for long distance traveling nowadays.
    1
  4176. tunespt I am not saying that EVs drive on renewables. Even on current electricity mix they are cleaner. Batteries don’t end up in landfills, manufacturers are obliged to take them back and recycle them. They like to because they are full of valuable materials.
    1
  4177. Mastermiloooo
    1
  4178.  @milanswoboda5457  You sir are correct. Driving electric is always the cleanest option, even when using carbon heavy electricity.
    1
  4179. Martijn Van Den Oever Auto’s met benzine- of dieselmotor worden verboden binnen 10 jaar dus je hebt gewoon pech.
    1
  4180. Martijn Van Den Oever Voor die mensen zijn er nog genoeg occasions hoor. Het gaat om de verkoop van nieuwe auto’s met een verbrandingsmotor.
    1
  4181. Plenty of issues with it
    1
  4182. Then don't eat meat.
    1
  4183. Wir sind schon da. Schau das Kanal Elektrotrucker mal an.
    1
  4184. Lol waar haal je die onzin vandaan
    1
  4185.  @aad9108  Die zijn er al meer dan 10 jaar mee bezig en waterstofauto’s zijn nog steeds slecht en inefficient. Ondertussen ontwikkelt en verkoopt Toyota veel meer elektrische auto’s.
    1
  4186.  @aad9108  De elektrische auto is enorm veel beter dan welke andere oplossing dan ook.
    1
  4187. Because that would require energy for on board electrolysis. Lots of energy.
    1
  4188. ​ @derkhaslol  We hebben nog lang geen duurzame energie over en als dit wel zo is, zit je met dat waterstofplan met een bedroevend inefficiënt opslagsysteem. Hierdoor zou de waterstoffabriek dus helemaal achteraan in de rij aansluiten als het gaat om het krijgen van (bijna) gratis energie. Dit komt praktisch nooit voor omdat er altijd wel partijen zijn te vinden die nog net iets meer over hebben voor een kWh'tje stroom om er iets anders mee te doen (auto's opladen, stationaire accu's opladen, nachtelijke productie in fabrieken draaiende houden enzovoort).
    1
  4189.  @HansKeesom  Jij begrijpt het Hans.
    1
  4190. Sigh..
    1
  4191. It will be 99% of the story.
    1
  4192. To what exactly are you referring
    1
  4193. CO2 ist dir egal?
    1
  4194.  @Technics-zq4hf  China erbaut mehr Windkraftanlage und PV als alle andere der Welt.
    1
  4195.  @HansG-it4bk  LOL
    1
  4196. SocialHostage Vreemd dat de Koreanen daar nu nog mee bezig gaan. In dit TNO-rapport wordt de uitstoot van LPG beschouwd (p.7): https://www.binnenlandsbestuur.nl/Uploads/2017/6/Factsheets-brandstoffen-wegverkeer-juni-2014.pdf 650 gram CO2 geldt voor puur prijze stroom. In Nederland is de gemiddelde uitstoot van de complete elektriciteitsmix 450 gram, volgens het CBS: https://www.binnenlandsbestuur.nl/Uploads/2017/6/Factsheets-brandstoffen-wegverkeer-juni-2014.pdf
    1
  4197. You would need A LOT more solar and wind power drive a similar distance as a battery EV. Solar panels and wind turbines don't come falling from the sky for free.
    1
  4198. Hou op met die onzin en informeer jezelf.
    1
  4199. reuse and eventually recycle.
    1
  4200.  @leeedsonetwo  Both wrong. Many companies are already working on reusing EV batteries for stationary applications and large scale recycling is also being prepared for (Red Wood Materials). EV battery quality is already so high that they will outlast the rest of the vehicle.
    1
  4201. You are clueless. Lithium ion batteries do not off-gas. But points for the originality.
    1
  4202.  @twrcrew8852  Exactly, these vents are designed to open in case of failure. This is not the case during normal operation like 'speeding or long term degradation'.
    1
  4203.  @twrcrew8852  You are simply making things up. Cell degradation does not result in leakage. If a cell becomes damaged (and leaks) for whatever reason this will be detected by the battery management system and the user will be alerted. It is simply impossible to keep driving around for long periods of time with several leaking cells.
    1
  4204. They both start with electricity. So the losses of electricity production do not belong in the equation.
    1
  4205.  @Samosayummyyay  Jij snapt het. Veel mensen denken dat waterstof op miraculeuze op aarde neer zal dalen ofzo xD
    1
  4206.  @janreitsma1096  Voor de duidelijkheid: waterstof in een verbrandingsmotor gooien is echt het domste wat we kunnen doen. De productie van waterstof door middel van elektriciteit is zo inefficient dat het veel te duur wordt om op te rijden. Een brandstofcel in een auto is een slecht idee, maar waterstof in de fik steken in een motor is echt het toppunt van inefficientie.
    1
  4207. Yup LFP is great. Many bus manufacturers use LFP for their electric busses.
    1
  4208. Hydrogen is a joke.
    1
  4209. Hyundai Ioniq is what you are looking for.
    1
  4210.  @acelakid94  The Ioniq 5 is an SUV. The original Ioniq is a sedan.
    1
  4211. Dat hoeft ook helemaal niet gelukkig. Stikstof is gewoon een probleem dat fatsoenlijk moet worden aangepakt en dat doen ze eindelijk.
    1
  4212. Yes they are.
    1
  4213.  @champanzee6486  No they are not.
    1
  4214.  @champanzee6486  The whole reason for switching to an alternative is CO2. It doesn’t make sense otherwise.
    1
  4215.  @musicfreak1579  genau!
    1
  4216.  @tombh74  This.
    1
  4217. LFP is a type of lithium ion.
    1
  4218.  @tijsp.8162 exactly
    1
  4219. Jätski.fi has very low efficiency
    1
  4220. How can you still love Elon?
    1
  4221. Of course they are rich which makes it all easier. But in the meantime Sweden is number two in Europe regarding EV registrations.
    1
  4222.  @andrejakobsson5790  Oh yes, but it is not a secret. It’s a great way to spend the fossil money.
    1
  4223. Zucht
    1
  4224. Your comment is laughable
    1
  4225. EVs are far more sustainable than any ICE car.
    1
  4226. It has zero potential because burning hydrogen in a combustion engine is insanely inefficient.
    1
  4227.  @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
  4228. gregor potrebujes Thanks
    1
  4229. Of course we should. The grid is fine and will grow accordingly.
    1
  4230.  @ganormand  We do not need considerably more electric energy. It’s more a matter of spreading power (smart charging).
    1
  4231.  @bealestreator8940  sorry, I missed that. Apparently it is true, other sources also write about it.
    1
  4232. It’s a paid a for Nissan. :(
    1
  4233. Of course, but outside of cities individual vehicles will still be required. Electric that is.
    1
  4234. Busses do fine on batteries.
    1
  4235. because it is far less than the pollution caused by petrol and diesel cars...
    1
  4236. So you think a petrol Corsa with 1.2 L engine has any ‘soul’? It’s all between the ears.
    1
  4237.  @NeilsCarsAviationTravel  Exactly and therefore it doesn’t matter. Any EV is a vast improvement when it comes to driving comfort over an average petrol petrol powered car.
    1
  4238.  @onepiececomrade  Could you tell me where in the video electricity production is mentioned?
    1
  4239.  @onepiececomrade  We were talking about electricity production, which is not mentioned in the video - as it should be for a proper comparison to EVs. There are barely any other viable methods for H2 production that make sense and actually reduce carbon emissions.
    1
  4240.  @palmshoot  Not lithium-ion batteries.
    1
  4241.  @palmshoot  So your point is?
    1
  4242. No you can't Patrick. Simple physics.
    1
  4243. You realize that due to that very bad efficiency we will also need to build and maintain much more wind turbines, solar panels en power stations?
    1
  4244. Der e-Sprinter kann man in verschiedene Versionen kaufen. Mit oder ohne Tempolimit.
    1
  4245. Just use it to charge your EV for free…
    1
  4246. ok wappie
    1
  4247. En dat is maar goed ook in dit geval.
    1
  4248. Wer interessiert ist, es handelt sich um DIN EN 997.
    1
  4249. Weg met de veehouderij.
    1
  4250. Ok wappie
    1
  4251. 'deze' 😂
    1
  4252. Typical whataboutism. Also, with CO2 tax companies will in fact do a lot to reduce their emissions.
    1
  4253. Oh well it's just a matter of time. These Polestars are so common here in Europe that I already completely forgot about what Polestar originally was. The big public didn't know Polestar anyway before this.
    1
  4254.  @Cynical_Ninja  Well it is a common car now because you can find Polestars 2 on the road regularly.
    1
  4255. Battery electric is far better than hydrogen.
    1
  4256.  @jivewig  Cost per mile is far lower and the technology a lot less complex. Fast charging networks are a lot easier to develop.
    1
  4257. Bla bla bla. Allemaal rare aannames gebaseerd op geruchten. Je leeft duidelijk zelf onder een of andere dikke betonplaat. Lees je eens fatsoenlijk in. Elektrisch is gewoon beter omdat het maken van diesel en benzine nog VELE MALEN slechter is dan het maken van een accu.
    1
  4258. tankeriv Doet er niet toe. Elektrisch is gewoon schoner. Zelfs als je altijd met kolenstroom laadt. Nogmaals, je bent duidelijk verkeerd geinformeerd. Elektrische auto’s zijn zodanig efficient dat de uitstoot per kilometer altijd lager ligt dan een diesel of benzine.
    1
  4259. tankeriv Ik zeg niet dat het groen is. Ik zeg dat het beter is dan doorrijden op diesel en benzine. Dat verzin ik niet zelf, dat is het resultaat van uitgebreid onderzoek. En Tesla’s uit 2014 doen het nog prima hoor, daar staan ze juist bekend om. Ik heb geen idee waar je dat verhaal vandaan haalt.
    1
  4260. @Frans Slagers lol goed verhaal man
    1
  4261. You prefer destroyed nature and ecosystems?
    1
  4262. The whole purpose of this van is that it is electric. In Europe VW sells the T7 van with hybrid drivetrain.
    1
  4263.  @penskepc2374  Yup. I am sure you will get there too.
    1
  4264.  @noelgibson5956  That’s great.
    1
  4265.  @AlphGen  Still much better in the long run.
    1
  4266.  @AlphGen  Why Singapore? EVs are perfectly usable in many parts of the world, especially North America and all over Europe. I indeed heard Australia is unfortunately still far behind on EVs and their infrastructure. It will be a matter of time.
    1
  4267. StillDrive lijkt er niet op.
    1
  4268. StillDrive je gaat volledig voorbij aan het feit dat elektrische voertuigen gewoonweg heel efficient zijn. Hierdoor stoot je dus altijd minder CO2 uit dan een auto met verbrandingsmotor, ookal wordt de stroom met bruinkool opgewekt.
    1
  4269. StillDrive elektriciteitscentrales zijn ook relatief efficient (hoger dan een dieselmotor). Tevens moet diesel eerst worden geraffineerd wat erg energieintensief is. Onder aan de streep is het electrische systeem gewoon efficienter en veroorzaakt daardoor minder CO2-uitstoot.
    1
  4270. StillDrive precies, en het winnen, transporteren, raffineren en verbranden van aardolieproducten brengt per kilometer meer CO2 met zich mee dan het delven en verbranden van steenkool en omzetten naar elektriciteit. Dit, nogmaals, om twee redenen: 1. Een elektrische auto is zeer efficient en komt dus verder per kWh. 2. Aardolieverwerking is inefficient en gaat gepaard met veel CO2-uitstoot.
    1
  4271. StillDrive en bovendien: efficientie staat niet gelijk aan snelheid. Het gaat om energie per afgelegde afstand. Lopen of fietsen is wel degelijk efficienter dan rijden met een (elektrische) auto.
    1
  4272.  @10punten  1 liter diesel = 10 kWh. Dus 1 km rijden met die diesel = 0.33 kWh per kilometer. Die Tesla zit dan op 0.2 kWh per kilometer. Komt nog bij dat een auto vergelijkbaar aan een Model S niet 1:30 rijdt maar hooguit 1:20. Dan kom je op 0.5 kWh/km voor de diesel. Daar komt nog bij dat diesel raffineren, en transporteren wel degelijk meer energie benodigd dan de verwerking en transport van steenkool naar 1 locatie (de centrale). En daar komt weer bij dat de meeste elektriciteit met aardgas en een kleiner deel hernieuwbare bronnen wordt opgewekt, wat tot een nog lagere uitstoot per kWh leidt.
    1
  4273.  @fransvaneekelen9136  Precies. Geld dat je bespaart als je gewoon thuis je elektrische auto kunt opladen en niet naar het tankstation van een of andere multinational moet.
    1
  4274. Wrong. EVs have been efficient from day one.
    1
  4275.  @Mogadypopz  Lead acid battery recycling never was a problem. Apart from that, the point is that EVs have always been efficient, hydrogen cars have not and never will be.
    1
  4276.  @april.2332  Ik heb geen problemen met akkerbouw hoor. De veehouderij is de grote vervuiler.
    1
  4277.  @jarne301  Geen akkerbouwers geen eten bedoel je! Veehouders kunnen we missen als kiespijn.
    1
  4278.  @Roanoo27  Door de veehouderij gaat Nederland naar de knoppen. Ik draag de akkerbouw een warm hart toe, maar de veehouderij is veel te vervuilend, dieronterend en niet van deze tijd.
    1
  4279.  @ry4743  Die overgang is in volle gang, of je het nou leuk vindt of niet. Alle vlees en zuivel gaat gepaard met dierenmishandeling en milieuvervuiling.
    1
  4280.  @ry4743  De mens moet niet 'ALLES' van soja hebben, maar zelfs al zouden we dat we willen dan nog zou het geen probleem zijn omdat het veel efficienter is dan vlees produceren. Voor het maken van vlees heb je namelijk veeeeel meer plantaardig materiaal nodig omdat het hele proces ontzettend inefficient is. Snap je?
    1
  4281.  @ry4743  Je begrijpt het begrip 'efficientie' niet?
    1
  4282.  @ry4743  Je argumentatie wordt er niet echt sterker op.
    1
  4283.  @ry4743  Moet je beter kijken.
    1
  4284. Makes no sense for passenger cars at all.
    1
  4285.  @klaasvaak7155  confronterend he, de realiteit
    1
  4286. So what do you propose for the future
    1
  4287.  @Senkino5o  If there is one industry famous for receiving gigantic amounts of subsidies it is oil and gas. Every time you fill up your tank you are taking advantage of that. All vehicles will eventually become fully electric, even heavy trucks. Of course this is currently not the case yet so it is understandable that you continue to drive yours.
    1
  4288. Wrong. You forgot to mention that hydrogen cars need batteries, fuel cells and fuel tanks. EVs are always the least carbon intense option.
    1
  4289.  @Brian-om2hh  Exactly!
    1
  4290. Jij duidelijk niet nee.
    1
  4291. Good to hear from a professional.
    1
  4292. 10 kg is not much right? It is not worth the effort. By the way, petrol engines also produce H2O at the tail pipe.
    1
  4293.  @Justan669  Hmmm, better just go with battery electric cars and use a small part of the loads of energy that are saved that way for water processing and infrastructure.
    1
  4294. Oh yes, eventually you will.
    1
  4295.  @Jasred263  We simply know. There is no alternative.
    1
  4296.  @Jasred263  absolutely no chance
    1
  4297. Definitely
    1
  4298. Benzine en diesel zal gewoon verdwijnen.
    1
  4299.  @nickv8816  No one I know likes or wants a big car.
    1
  4300.  @BrunoHeggli-zp3nl  true! Things have improved a lot in EV space.
    1
  4301. @ that looks great!
    1
  4302.  @nickv8816  Look at the list of best selling cars in Europe. The majority of the top 10 is about half a meter shorter than a Model 3.
    1
  4303. Common misconception. Emissions are always lower compared to diesel or gasoline due to higher efficiencies.
    1
  4304. nope
    1
  4305. @killkiss_son The ID series are doing great honestly.
    1
  4306. hydrogen is stupid for cars.
    1
  4307. ok wappie
    1
  4308. Not at all. Obviously their previous EVs were not scrapped but went back on the market making it cheaper for other people to switch to EVs. We need A LOT of second hand EVs so it is great rich people are buying a lot of new ones.
    1
  4309. How clueless can you be
    1
  4310. Die subsidie bestaat ook…
    1
  4311. EV is much better
    1
  4312. Not at all. Batteries it is for 95% of the cases.
    1
  4313.  @johnra-x8p  Meneer woont waarschijnlijk in Nederland waar de hoogste laadpaaldichtheid ter wereld is.
    1
  4314. Wat dacht je van CO2?!
    1
  4315.  @kni3106  Van aardgas natuurlijk. Je vergeet het broeikaseffect grapjas.
    1
  4316.  @kni3106  Onzin. Heb je een bron voor dat Illinois-verhaal?
    1
  4317.  @dean1100110  Not at all.
    1
  4318.  @dean1100110  Price per mile will be higher than a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle and far higher than a battery electric car.
    1
  4319. There is by far not enough waste to let the world run on methane.
    1
  4320.  @anthonybonfiglio9288  Accumulated yes, but daily production won’t be sufficient.
    1
  4321.  @DavGreg  Despite that it is a great solution.
    1
  4322. Just physics
    1
  4323. It is not a future fuel.
    1
  4324.  @chigglywiggly  Too inefficient and still produces massive amounts of CO2. Nothing futuristic about that.
    1
  4325.  @chigglywiggly  Read your own article. Methanol is produced from natural gas (methane) and therefore the CO2 is from fossil origin.
    1
  4326.  @chigglywiggly  Even then it is a very inefficient way to propel a vehicle and also requires vast amounts of land that we actually need to feed the world.
    1
  4327.  @chigglywiggly  But horribly inefficient 😂
    1
  4328.  @chigglywiggly  Equally inefficient.
    1
  4329. Batteries don’t require replacing.
    1
  4330.  @batiatusm6346  Correct, but this is a very slow process. Current generation EVs have batteries that outlast the rest of the vehicle.
    1
  4331.  @batiatusm6346  Correct. But battery health will still be very usable when the vehicle nears end of life.
    1
  4332.  @Daeva83B  Ik ben het volledig met je eens, maar dit nieuwsitem specifiek gaat over stikstof, niet over koolstofdioxide.
    1
  4333. @Tim Bosveld Wind heeft weinig te maken met de stikstofproblematiek. Het gaat om de grote dichtheid aan stikstofveroorzakers.
    1
  4334. Een Nissan Leaf heb je vanaf 35k en een Model 3 vanaf 47k.
    1
  4335.  @Chainyanker007  Charging to 100% is no problem overnight. So you start the day with a full range and then top off to 80% at a fast charger later in the day. That is 150 + 120 miles of range.
    1
  4336. Even if production was efficient, the rest of it still remains very inefficient.
    1
  4337.  @r.i.peperoniiiiroh9625  Not really. A heat pump consumes 1 to 2 kW so that is about 10% higher consumption. Data shows that most EV batteries are doing fine after many years of use and that EVs sell well on the second hand market.
    1
  4338. Even if it is partly powered by coal it is perfectly fine. Electric is always cleaner.
    1
  4339.  @JBGAMBIT  So many wrong assumptions. Of course I know how batteries and wind turbines are made. Production emissions are quickly compensated for as soon as they start operating. A wind turbine: half a year. An electric car: about 4 years. Inform yourself.
    1
  4340.  @JBGAMBIT  is this a poem?
    1
  4341.  @JBGAMBIT  😂
    1
  4342.  @JBGAMBIT  Very well probably. EVs are completely sealed and function better in water than an ICE car. Gas stations don’t work under water either.
    1
  4343.  @DerTyp-dc4jb  Viel weniger Teile benötigt
    1
  4344.  @DerTyp-dc4jb  Motor und Getriebe viel weniger Teile. Elektromotor und Batterie sind viel einfacher automatisch zu produzieren.
    1
  4345. Building fast chargers is A LOT cheaper than hydrogen stations. "maybe some day we can use natural gas to power electric motor" Why on earth would we do that. It's not more efficient in any way.
    1
  4346.  @orcofnbu  Hybrids were cool in the early 2000's. It's over now - we need to look for solutions that actually make sense emission wise. Hydrogen is three times less efficient than batteries and cannot be stored in existing petrol stations. Hydrogen refueling stations are very expensive to build as well. Expanding electric infrastructure is cheaper and easier.
    1
  4347. orçun Battery production is not as bad as most people think. We are currently at about 100 kg of CO2 per kWh and this is declining every year. This means you already break even at about 50.000 km compared to a petrol car. Hydrogen is inefficient the car’s entire lifetime, battery production only once.
    1
  4348. @CrazieBlacks Zoals gezegd, je komt alleen maar met compleet gedateerde en allang ontkrachte informatie aanzetten. Zeg je abonnement op de Telegraaf eens op. Accuproductie zit momenteel zo rond de 100 kg CO2 per kWh capaciteit. Een accu van 50 kWh maken veroorzaakt dus 5000 kg CO2. Dat is weinig en heb je na twee jaar rijden, oftewel zo'n 30 a 40 duizend kilometer gecompenseerd.
    1
  4349. Not at all necessary. Charging is far superior.
    1
  4350.  @JaySee5 Swapping is very complicated and therefore expensive and hard to scale. You need insane numbers of batteries otherwise you will still be fast charging every pack to replenish the stock. Barely anyone is going to pay twice the price just to save 10 minutes of time.
    1
  4351.  @JaySee5  You still always need more batteries despite optimization. Again: scalability is an issue due to complexity and therefore price. And again, current state of fast charging simply doesn’t require something like swapping. Will play swapping a role in vehicle electrification? Sure, it already does. But it will just remain a niche as the majority of EV owners just don’t need and won’t use it. Not required for general EV adoption in the slightest way.
    1
  4352.  @JaySee5  Your last sentence spoils it all.
    1
  4353.  @anonsenitl  nein
    1
  4354. challenging, but possible
    1
  4355. 2.4 miles/kWh is not low for a van. It simply comes down to drag.
    1
  4356. They are betting against physics. Never a great idea.
    1
  4357. Hydrogen is super expensive dude.
    1
  4358. The oil industry is one of the biggest cobalt consumers where it is used to deshulphurize fuel.
    1
  4359. Fernverkehr ist schon möglich one Megawattcharger. Und nein, laden dauert nicht ‚stundenlang‘ mit ein 300 kW CCS Lader.
    1
  4360.  @kronotec9579  Einfach das Kanal Elektrotrucker schauen.
    1
  4361. Exactly Carl.
    1
  4362. Lol so where would the energy come from to produce that hydrogen? xD
    1
  4363.  @The-qh3vg  If the car would be driving on 100% hydrogen it would stop driving when the battery is empty. Simple physics.
    1
  4364. Low losses in transport, and 'refueling'. It actually is 70 to 80% in real life.
    1
  4365. Great choice.
    1
  4366. But very inefficient.
    1
  4367. Natural gas prices in Europe have been back at pre-war levels for over a year now.
    1
  4368. Of course not.
    1
  4369.  @phelhadsu4080  It’s all weather sealed.
    1
  4370. That would be the smallest problem.
    1
  4371. yes, but plenty of other countries in Europe are doing the same
    1
  4372. Also you will own an EV.
    1
  4373.  @ronvandereerden4714  exactly
    1
  4374. Not really
    1
  4375. Bart Van Gorp Nederland doet gelukkig al heel wat aan de stimulering van elektrische auto’s. Dat waterstof niet populair is moeten we blij mee zijn want het is gewoon bedroevend inefficient. Net als gloeilampen zou het verboden moeten worden.
    1
  4376.  @bartvangorp3997  U heeft er duidelijk nooit eenvoudige rekensommen aan gewaagd. Ik ben bekend met de genoemde alternatieve wijzen van waterstofopslag en -productie. Ze verhogen het lage rendement echter nooit noemenswaardig en komen in de verste verte niet in de buurt van de efficiëntie van een accu.
    1
  4377. Bart Van Gorp De manier van energieopwekking is in dit verhaal niet relevant. Waterstof is en blijft een energiedrager met een bedroevend laag rendement ten opzichte van een accu.
    1
  4378. Bart Van Gorp Bedroevend laag ja. Systematische energieverspilling hoort niet in deze tijd thuis. Een elektrische auto kun je overigens probleemloos een paar maanden laten staan en er dan vrolijk mee wegrijden.
    1
  4379. Bart Van Gorp Het is mij volstrekt onduidelijk waarom je alweer kernenergie bij dit verhaal probeert te betrekken. Los daarvan: Grootschalige centrale waterstofopslag om de winter door te komen zou inderdaad een van de weinige toepassingen van waterstof kunnen worden. Erop rijden bijvoorbeeld absoluut niet.
    1
  4380. Bart Van Gorp Jouw voorbeeld laat dus precies het chronische gebrek aan efficiëntie zien. Voor een batterij-elektrische auto heb je slechts 1/3e van die hoeveelheid energie nodig.
    1
  4381. Bart Van Gorp hallo?
    1
  4382.  @jurjenvanderhoek316  Zoals je weet behelst klimaatverandering veel meer dan alleen de stijging van de zeespiegel. Zo stormt het bijvoorbeeld vaker en heftiger. Dit heeft veel invloed op het versnellen van erosie.
    1
  4383. 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
  4384. 1) Where I live I see chargers at public and private parkings more and more. 2) Tesla expects about 400000 miles for the battery, that's far more than 10 years driving for most people. And then what? The worn out modules can be replaced for a few thousand $ each. 3) Superchargers 4) You don't have to charge for hours. And you have to stop for sanitairy reasons anyway, right? 5) Model 3's will last much longer than that.
    1
  4385. Quyen Nguyen Dealer of what brand?
    1
  4386. Quyen Nguyen Weird...
    1
  4387.  @QuyenNguyen-cp4eq  Yeah that should be it. Currect battery tech is very different.
    1
  4388. Wrong and you know that.
    1
  4389. Lol because they cause of lot of CO2 maybe?
    1
  4390. Efficiency cannot be improved. It’s just physics.
    1
  4391.  @simonramoner  Efficiency is not a problem at all with batteries. It’s over 90%.
    1
  4392.  @simonramoner  Yes, we need gigantic battery production plants. There are already several under construction. And that is great. Power generation is not a concern.
    1
  4393.  @Brian-om2hh  nice!
    1
  4394.  @stefan2796 Difference in payload capacity is not that big.
    1
  4395. An e-tron GT is giant and heavy…
    1
  4396. Nee dat is het niet, daarvoor is en blijft waterstof veel te inefficient.
    1
  4397. Lol another Stanley Meyer scam believer.
    1
  4398. Leon Exactly
    1
  4399. The problem is battery weight and cost.
    1
  4400. Lol a hydrogen car is not producing anything
    1
  4401.  @saleh.hashmi  Hydrogen cars refuel at hydrogen stations. A fuel cell converts hydrogen to water and electricity. The electricity runs the motor.
    1
  4402.  @saleh.hashmi  Using hydrogen in an internal combustion engine is even less efficient. It's a dumb idea.
    1
  4403.  @saleh.hashmi  Efficiency determines the price. Hydrogen gas is not abundant at all.
    1
  4404. Zo werkt het niet grapjas. Bovendien doet Nederland het veel slechter dan de meeste landen.
    1
  4405. Nothing, just reversed functionality.
    1
  4406. Hopefully. (Watt-hour per kilometer)
    1
  4407. Lol so much misinformation.
    1
  4408.  @lucrolland7489  Your complete comment. Batteries are lowering emissions a lot, even if fossil electricity is used. There are no entire countries are destroyed due to battery production. Batteries are not worse than diesel if you consider the fuel life cycle.
    1
  4409.  @lucrolland7489  Of course efficient mass transport is better. That is obvious. The question was whether EVs are better than petrol and diesel cars, and that is clearly the case. Here is a very extensive and recent report: https://www.avere.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/englisch_Studie-EAuto-versus-Verbrenner_CO2.pdf
    1
  4410. Except that you can just use a regular socket.
    1
  4411. Yeah that was a famous myth..
    1
  4412.  @FabioCapela  exactly
    1
  4413. So you think fuel cells grow on trees?
    1
  4414. It doesn’t really matter as modern EVs are barely slower on long trips than ICE cars.
    1
  4415. Dierlijke producten zijn sowieso ongeschikt om de groeiende wereldbevolking te voeden.
    1
  4416.  @robertdemeijer4465  2. Dit is een mythe. Netbeheerder Tennet heeft zelf aangegeven geen problemen te verwachten. Let wel, de meeste mensen zullen niet dagelijks laden.
    1
  4417.  @robertdemeijer4465  https://cleartechnology.nl/elektriciteitsnet-klaar-ev-storm/
    1
  4418. For your perspective: “Livestock make up 62% of the world's mammal biomass; humans account for 34%; and wild mammals are just 4%.”
    1
  4419. Just because the eco diesels were a scam, this does not prove anything about other technologies. EVs actually make a lot of sense.
    1
  4420. Nope. There is more than enough data to proof that EV batteries will easily last 10+ years. After that they can be used in stationary applications and eventually they will be recycled. Hydrogen is simply too inefficient and complex.
    1
  4421. Voor EVs total production emissions of the battery pack are at about 100 kg of CO2 per kWh. Not too bad and definitely worth it.
    1
  4422.  @ok0_0  Will definitely play a role. You still need batteries though.
    1
  4423.  @OneWildTurkey  As in, in-vehicle reactors?
    1
  4424. Cope harder.
    1
  4425.  @arendvanfelius2444  Ooit van cholesterol gehoord?
    1
  4426.  @larryc1616  There is an electric Gwagon.
    1
  4427.  @BrunoHeggli-zp3nl You know why ICE is junk.
    1
  4428. But will help lowering total emissions.
    1
  4429. Omdat doorrijden op benzine of diesel nog veel slechter is.
    1
  4430. Neehoor.
    1
  4431.  @ElleRutgers  nope
    1
  4432. Because that is not the problem.
    1
  4433.  @martsvan1  Yup and that is exactly why power spreading (peak shaving) is so important. We only need about 10 kWh per day per vehicle on average- so it is just a matter of spreading that out over, lets say, 12 hours.
    1
  4434. Lol you did not watch the video apparently.
    1
  4435.  @braggland8451  my videos?
    1
  4436. Not relevant. Electric is always cleaner.
    1
  4437. idd 👍🏻
    1
  4438. LOL
    1
  4439. No it won't. Hydrogen is terribly inefficient.
    1
  4440. I think I see what you mean, but I highly doupt this would actually make sense, even in Japan. 'Slow' charging doesn't take up much space (in theory any lamp post can become one) and doesn't require huge improvements of the grid. Most drivers can get around with only charging at a slow rate during the night. Rapid chargers are easily placed along motorways, just like petrol stations. Japan is importing all of its hydrogen from Australia where it is made from coal and then shipped to Japan.
    1
  4441. "Diesel over Electric hybrid drive bus instead?" Because it would still consume massive amounts of diesel. And hauling around a diesel engine for 10 years just because the batteries might need replacement one day?!
    1
  4442.  @10100rsn  Generating your own energy using an engine is terribly inefficient. A fully electric bus using grid energy for charging is much better emissions wise.
    1
  4443. Of course not
    1
  4444. 60% of all EVs produced on earth are sold in China.
    1
  4445. Proper EVs can cover 1000 km in about 10 hours by using fast chargers.
    1
  4446. Not at all. Pretty much all road vehicles will be battery electric.
    1
  4447. Laurens Peek Klopt, maar door de bedroevend lage efficiëntie zorgt waterstof indirect voor CO2-uitstoot omdat het schaarse hernieuwbare stroom weggooit. Daardoor moeten andere toepassingen meer gebruik maken van grijze stroom. Dit fenomeen heet verdringing.
    1
  4448.  @LaurensPP  Verdringing is de situatie waarbij hernieuwbare energie door waterstofproductie wordt wegekaapt bij andere afnemers zoals woningen en elektrische auto's. Dit leidt tot meer CO2-uitstoot. Hierdoor kan het zo zijn dat het beter is om door te varen op stookolie, dan in te zetten op waterstof. Ontwikkeling is goed, maar het nu toepassen is veel te vroeg (lees: enkele decennia).
    1
  4449. But batteries are by far the best solution we currently have for vehicle energy storage and this will remain so for many decades - until something else comes up.
    1
  4450. Many cars automatically lock the doors.
    1
  4451. Not relevant. Even on fossil electricity electric cars are cleaner
    1
  4452.  @tomakker7498  Nederland zal juist veel mooier worden met deze plannen.
    1
  4453.  @stephenc8956  yes.
    1
  4454.  @quillo2747  Carbon tax is the solution
    1
  4455. Jouni Airplane Video's Ik zeg niet dat iedereen per direct zn caravan moet weg doen, maar eens serieus nadenken over een kleiner exemplaar (met een tentje), een vouwwagen of gewoon één fatsoenlijke tent kan geen kwaad. De elektrische auto laat duidelijk zien hoe ontzettend inefficient het is om zo’n log object naar de andere kant van Europa te vervoeren puur om een paar weekjes vakantie te kunnen vieren.
    1
  4456. Jouni Airplane Video's Ik zeg dat men er over na kan denken. Niet meer, niets minder.
    1
  4457. Je vergeet dat Nederland veel meer stikstof produceert dan andere landen en ook nog eens veel minder natuur heeft.
    1
  4458. Where do you get this BS 😂
    1
  4459. 😂
    1
  4460. Already a thousand other comments mention this... Battery production emissions are not relevant because fuel cell production emissions are not included either.
    1
  4461. The Nothing Channel Nope. Most cobalt is fine and cobalt content in EV batteries is getting less and less every year.
    1
  4462. It's very simple: EV adoption needs to happen fast.
    1
  4463.  @rudywoodcraft9553  CO2
    1
  4464. You sir are correct.
    1
  4465. Well then imagine what you save on gas lol
    1
  4466.  @quasimodo8959  😄
    1
  4467. Battery electric still has the lowest carbon life cycle emissions of them all.
    1
  4468. Zou dit account eigenlijk verdienen aan de reclame-inkomsten?
    1
  4469.  @Amber-pk3jj  dankje
    1
  4470.  @powerplayer75  😃
    1
  4471. More like 30,000 miles.
    1
  4472. Resale value is terrible for most new cars, regardless of the drivetrain. Therefore one should buy used.
    1
  4473. Niet echt
    1
  4474. MrCougar214 They don’t use explosions at brine lakes.
    1
  4475. MrCougar214 Simply not true. The vast majority of lithium comes from brine lakes. No explosions there.
    1
  4476. Anders ga je je effe inlezen.
    1
  4477. @PartyJo :P Bussen zijn er niet om mooi te zijn maar om mensen zo efficiënt, comfortabel en schoon mogelijk van A naar B te brengen. Elektromotoren zijn minstens zo krachtig als dieselmotoren, zowel die diesel Mercedessen als deze nieuwe elektrische bussen zijn leverbaar met motoren van rond de 200 kW.
    1
  4478. But super inefficient to produce.
    1
  4479. Wrronng. Where do you even get this shit in 2024? All the information is easy to find dude.
    1
  4480. Sure, but it is inefficient.
    1
  4481.  @rocko44444444  Because the volumetric energy density is very low and because electrolyzers and fuel cells are inefficient.
    1
  4482. Heel goed 👍🏻 hopelijk worden het er snel meer
    1
  4483. wuuht Veehouders zijn nooit zielig.
    1
  4484. 15%*
    1
  4485. Hydrogen cars have onboard batteries.
    1
  4486.  @mindaugas49ccm  Lithium-ion batteries, not lead acid.
    1
  4487. Why would you buy new?
    1
  4488. Why would you buy new?
    1
  4489. It’s great the government is finally doing something about this disgusting industry.
    1
  4490. Not at all. Livestock farming as it exists today is just totally unsustainable.
    1
  4491. no it will not.
    1
  4492. Exactly so there is nothing wrong with the comparison.
    1
  4493. Philip, you cannot create energy out of nothing. Simple physics.
    1
  4494.  @philiplmoore3995  Solar panels are a totally different story of course. It uses the sun as an energy source, not the car itself... Again, you cannot defeat simple laws of physics. Not today, not tomorrow.
    1
  4495. Wrong. Electric vehicles are always less polluting, no matter what. An no, clean diesels do not exist.
    1
  4496.  @windyblown2383  I know, that why I said 'no matter what'. Even on mainly non renewable energy CO2 emissions are still lower than diesel.
    1
  4497.  @windyblown2383  Average emissions per kWh per year is what counts.
    1
  4498. You are clearly behind on wind and solar.
    1
  4499. 1. There is always an average amount of cars charging at any given moment of the day. They are perfect for storing excess power (in a much more efficient way too). 2. DC high voltage distribution is MUCH more efficent than hydrogen gas transportation. 3. Again, DC high voltage lines.
    1
  4500. hamobu 1. The chargers always work, just the charging power is adjusted. This already exists and works well. We are talking slow chargers here of course - for over night charging. 2. You don’t really need to go transatlantic to get near the equator. Here is a nice report: https://www.e3s-conferences.org/articles/e3sconf/pdf/2019/40/e3sconf_esr2019_02003.pdf You can skip right to the conlusion where you will find DC power distribution is way more efficient up until 6000 km. That will be more than enough in most cases.
    1
  4501. hamobu This exists where I live: https://group.vattenfall.com/press-and-media/news--press-releases/pressreleases/2019/largest-smart-electric-vehicle-charging-network-optimizes-use-of-renewable-energy-in-amsterdam I can imagine that you can come up with a few business cases for shipping energy around the world but it still doesn’t sound efficient at all to me compared to building a great DC grid once and then being able to lean back and enjoy these electrons coming in by themselves.
    1
  4502.  @hamobu  "Flexpower Amsterdam is a smart network of charging stations that enables faster charging of electric cars when the sun is shining"
    1
  4503.  @hamobu  Exactly. And charging will be faster when there is more renewable supply. That is storage.
    1
  4504.  @hamobu  It does both. It is focused on using as much local solar as possible. If not, then it will charge at high speed using mainly fossil / general grid energy. "The Flexpower charging stations are adjusted in such a way that they can be steered based on the daily forecast of solar energy and grid loads."
    1
  4505.  @hamobu  You don't have to wait longer because they simply switch to grid power when there is not enough solar. This happens every night. The point is that it will give priority to solar when there is a lot of it available. This prevents the solar from having to enter the grid. It gets stored in the EV batteries instead. You can do exact the same thing with stationary batteries in homes (i.e. Powerwalls). No hydrogen needed.
    1
  4506. hamobu Storing means you can use it later. Apart from that, bidirectional charging also already exists.
    1
  4507. hamobu It’s not speculative. It exists already.
    1
  4508. Water comes back from the car..
    1
  4509. Has nothing to do with electric cars specifically.
    1
  4510. 😂
    1
  4511. Leonardo Chudin They last much longer and will then be reused and eventually recycled.
    1
  4512. exactly my thoughts..
    1
  4513. Rapid chargers with built-in battery packs already exist and thus provide a much more efficient solution. Apart from that: there is always an average number of cars (slow) charging from the grid at a random moment. Smart charging technology allows for variable power output depending on grid load at that time. EVs will contribute to grid stability, hydrogen would simply be an unnecesary and inefficient solution to this problem.
    1
  4514. SwaPPing is expensive and the infrastructure as well. You also need more batteries in total. Swapping is not necessary, except for some corner case situations like super long distance driving where time is key. Charging is far superior in all other situations.
    1
  4515.  @yank-blood-no-eat-get  Yes swapping (again, with P!) will play a role, but it will not be a mass solution. Battery swapping infrastructure is expensive and not easily scalable. Queues will therfore be huge and after a while the station will simply run out of charged batteries. The best solution will always be expanding AC charging options.
    1
  4516. + wind and hydro
    1
  4517.  @benjones5799  Solar and wind are complementary. We need wind at times there is not much sun. The microplastic story is pretty much a myth and bird kill rate is absolutely nothing compared to cats, glass buildings and vehicles. CO2 emissions caused by the construction of turbines is compensated for within less than a year of operation.
    1
  4518. Toch levert het grote hoeveelheden hernieuwbare energie voor ons allemaal op.
    1
  4519. Diesel is never clean.
    1
  4520.  @dezafinado  No matter what, combustion engines produce harmful emissions and CO2.
    1
  4521.  @dezafinado  Common misconceptions. Of course mining of lithium is not ‘clean’. Mining is never clean. Driving an EV is always the least polluting as life cycle emissions are lower than a gasoline or diesel car, even if mainly non-renewable electricity is used. That is why EV adoption is so important.
    1
  4522.  @dezafinado  Sure, but we were comparing EVs to ICE vehicles here.
    1
  4523. All countries in the world have to reinforce their grids, there is no way around it and it is obviously worth it.
    1
  4524.  @peterpan5295  Zoek eens op wat 'whataboutism' betekent.
    1
  4525. There are many companies and governments focusing on increasing renewable production.
    1
  4526. Exactly.
    1
  4527. Super unnecessary, too complicated, efficiency would be horribly low.
    1
  4528. The comparison is about the energy efficiency. Production is a whole other story and in that case you should also include production emissions of the hydrogen fuel cell and fuel tanks.
    1
  4529. Not really. Norway has been doing fine for 10 years as world's leading EV country.
    1
  4530.  @DUlmer  No problem at all.
    1
  4531.  @arefin727tech  And your country is?
    1
  4532. Jij bent hoogleraar luchtkwaliteit?
    1
  4533.  @iandavies4853 exactly
    1
  4534.  @Dutchtreat-pn3cj En uiteindelijk zullen in Polen ook stikstofproblemen ontstaan. En nee, dierlijk eiwit is niet broodnodig.
    1
  4535. Volksvagon?
    1
  4536. You are stuck in 2010?
    1
  4537. Tadgh Smith In 2020 electric cars do not take one hour to charge
    1
  4538.  @tadghsmith1457  lol fast charging takes 20 minutes on average. Electric police cars are being used in many countries with great succes. In a real emergency any type of refuelling or charging is too long.
    1
  4539. Tadgh Smith Lol do you have a fuel pump in your garage?
    1
  4540. Tadgh Smith It’s just a matter of time before every town and village in the world has fast chargers.
    1
  4541. Tadgh Smith You clearly have no clue of where we already are and what is going to happen within the next 10 years. All cars will be electric.
    1
  4542. Tadgh Smith Again, it is clear you have no clue of the current status of electric cars when you keep mentioning range, cost and charging speed. Practically none of these subjects are an issue anymore in 2020 and definitely not in 2025. Hybrids and fuel cell cars simply won’t have a right to exist in the near future because of advances in battery tech. It’s simple as that.
    1
  4543. Tadgh Smith Energy density (and power density definitely not either!) is not really a problem for cars. Tesla’s current Long Range models are getting very close to that of a liquid fueled car range wise without being unacceptably heavy. A hydrogen car like the Mirai has an equal range and weighs about the same. You are simply wrong when it comes to range. It’s only 2020 and we are pretty much there technology wise. Prices will drop significally the next 5-10 years (like they have been over the last years) and with next generation battery tech (see Tesla’s 4680 cell) it will be completely out of the question wether an EV or an ICE is better. Hydrogen is just dumb for vehicles because it is so incredibly inefficient and cumbersome.
    1
  4544. Tadgh Smith Efficiency has never been the problem with batteries... You don’t seem to understand Tesla’s new battery. It is larger, more energy dense by weight and volume and it is cheaper to produce. And I say it one more time: we are pretty much already there. Cost has gone down a lot compared to 5 years ago and this will continue. EVs allow you to charge when you sleep, every morning you drive away with a full battery. Fast charging is only for occasional long trips and often takes less than 20 minutes. You need a break anyway after hours of driving. It is a non issue. Hydrogen actually HAS serious problems with efficiency and this will never improve considerably due to simple laws of physics. Due to this hydrogen cars are much more expensive to run and cause much higher emissions per mile and they also require much more maintenance. Also: fuel cells wear out much faster than any battery. Proper EV batteries last hundreds of thousands of miles and will often actually outlive the car. Hydrogen is dead on arrival.
    1
  4545. Tadgh Smith Of course you can come up with some scenarios in which a certain type of car would not be so practical. Fact is that an electric car is perfectly useable in 99% of the situations for 99% of the people, even now in 2020 and definitely in 2030. And no, in the future you don’t need to search for fast chargers - they will be simply everywhere. Just like gas station. It’s out of the question. Also, it will be a simple matter legislation. In 10 years sales of diesel and petrol cars will be banned in most of Europe and California for example.
    1
  4546.  @tadghsmith1457  The reason is just price.
    1
  4547. Shows really nicely how a declining population directly effects CO2 emissions.
    1
  4548. Well you can buy the stripped down 'cargo' version already in Europe.
    1
  4549. He did that and explains it in the video as well.
    1
  4550.  @EMBer3000  Yeah that's where he mentions 'well to wheel emissions'. So upstream and downstream emissions are included.
    1
  4551. Exactly
    1
  4552.  @bremo2059  'ze maken' helemaal niks duurder. Dat kosten elektrische auto's gewoon. De prijs is de afgelopen jaren al enorm gezakt dus dat komt van zelf goed.
    1
  4553. Ben Benieuwd Laden langs de snelweg is inderdaad prijzig, maar thuis blijft het natuurlijk spotgoedkoop. En wat dan nog? Het gaat niet alleen om de prijs, het gaat er om dat we met zn allen overstappen op een betere een schonere technologie.
    1
  4554. Jannes Verly Zeker en daar wordt ook hard aan gewerkt. Het aandeel hernieuwbare energie neemt elk jaar (langzaam) toe. Het mooie is echter dat een elektrische auto ook de schoonste oplossing is als je ‘m wel met grijze stroom oplaadt. Het is dus altijd beter. Daarom is het van groot belang dat de transitie naar elektrisch rijden zo snel mogelijk gaat - ook al is er nog lang niet zo veel groene stroom als we zouden willen.
    1
  4555. Jannes Verly Klopt, dat is inderdaad belangrijk. Tesla, LG en een aantal andere bedrijven verkopen al accu’s om thuis energie op te slaan. Deze kunnen gerust voor een paar dagen je huis van elektriciteit voorzien als het nodig is.
    1
  4556. Obviously a combination of all above + wind and solar.
    1
  4557. You are confusing waste with emissions. Two completely different things.
    1
  4558. You just think there are too many issues
    1
  4559. Niemand beweert dat deze rechtszaak dé oplossing is. Het is gewoon een hele mooie eerste stap, ook al zullen we er voorlopig niet heel veel van merken inderdaad. Hopelijk volgen er nog vele. En inderdaad, de oplossing komt natuurlijk van twee kanten: de producent en de consument.
    1
  4560. Most 2013 Tesla Model S cars are still doing fine on their original battery.
    1
  4561. Check the density of concrete and that of water.
    1
  4562.  @calciumkid0568  It would require a lot more space and height.
    1
  4563.  @calciumkid0568  Yeah, but both water and sand would require a lot lot of supporting structure around each unit to contain the medium and support all the other units. Probably made of steel, which is expensive and carbon intensive.
    1
  4564.  @calciumkid0568  If the units are stacked they would simply burst under the weight.
    1
  4565.  @pcdispatch  Het is evident dat elektriciteit een stuk schoner is geworden de afgelopen jaren.
    1
  4566.  @janhelleman6017  gezellig
    1
  4567.  @AlmavanKassel-Mafait  Zeg het maar, wat stel jij voor?
    1
  4568.  @SvenLastname  Ga je inlezen man. Dit is borrelpraat.
    1
  4569. Maar wel met veel minder. Grapjas.
    1
  4570. Een vrij loze opmerking. Natuurlijk is biomassa niet echt iets om trots op te zijn, maar het centraal verstoken van biomassa in een moderne centrale levert veel minder ongezonde emissies op dan primitieve houtkachels.
    1
  4571. Dan ga je het nog moeilijk krijgen in de toekomst 😂
    1
  4572. EVs are still fare less polluting.
    1
  4573. Inform yourself.
    1
  4574. Lekker bezig!
    1
  4575.  @oegromov  Wat is precies bullshit?
    1
  4576.  @thenonexistinghero  Daarom zijn die boosters ook zo belangrijk.
    1
  4577.  @StripeDeStripper  Fout
    1
  4578.  @hattmancock6396  Gezonde mensen nemen het vaccin niet voor zichzelf maar om verspreiding te voorkomen, heb je dat anno 2021 nog steeds niet begrepen?!
    1
  4579.  @P2Yproductions  Je leest niet goed. Het is heel simpel: meer vaccinates = minder mensen in het ziekenhuis. Natuurlijke immuniteit zal inderdaad uiteindelijk een groot deel van het probleem oplossen, zoals je zegt: met ons imuunsysteem is niets mis. Alleen kunnen we niet te veel natuurlijke immuniteit tegelijk laten ontstaan omdat de zorg dat niet aankan. Het virus is simpelweg té besmettelijk. We moeten het dus uitspreiden over de tijd. Dat uitspreiden kan alleen door middel van maatregelen en vaccineren.
    1
  4580.  @paolojoosten6353  Het is om de maatschappij te beschermen. De maatschappij kan niet normaal functioneren bij te veel besmettingen zoals we weten.
    1
  4581.  @paolojoosten6353  Ik hoop dat je zelf zorg nodig hebt binnenkort.
    1
  4582. EV batteries will not need replacing. They outlast the vehicle. Fuel cells degrade over time and eventually need replacing.
    1
  4583.  @Veangent  Only a few per cent per year. Current batteries are so big that they are still perfectly usable after 10 years.
    1
  4584. Enkel voor een zeer select aantal toepassingen zoals kunstmest- en staalproductie. Niet voor voertuigen en verwarming.
    1
  4585. Which is not the case.
    1
  4586. You sir are officially clueless
    1
  4587.  @gerryoconnor5846  methane
    1
  4588.  @gerryoconnor5846  methane
    1
  4589.  @Antony-ng9yj  Yeah, that is the problem
    1
  4590. Well said. This video is just terrible FUD and 99% of the comments seem to love it.
    1
  4591. Batteries compensate quite quickly for their production emissions because of their efficiency. A hydrogen system is inefficient its entire life.
    1
  4592.  @absolutium  Still far better than the low efficiency of hydrogen systems.
    1
  4593. Hybrids were cool 20 years ago.
    1
  4594. ‘On demand hydrogen’ lol. First spend more energy to turn the alternator, then get less of that energy back from the fuel cell. What’s the point?
    1
  4595. Huge hydrogen energy storage for seasonal purposes - yea probably. Transporting the hydrogen? Nah way too inefficient and why would you?
    1
  4596. You won't because it would be even less efficient than a FCEV.
    1
  4597. Lisanne Je staart je blind op de details. Dieren die gebruikt worden voor voedselproductie hebben nooit een goed leven.
    1
  4598. Dus omdat stroom niet volledig duurzaam wordt opgewekt blijf je maar lekker diesel of benzine in je auto gieten?
    1
  4599. and he is right
    1
  4600. Everyone knows already that Planet of the Humans is full of shit and fake news.
    1
  4601. Like you said, parkings will be (and already are) equipped with EV chargers. Over night charging covers 90% of all charging. For the sporadic a fast charge current gas stations will definitely play a role. This normally doesn't need to take longer than 15 to 20 minutes which is very acceptable I think.
    1
  4602.  @explorinlearnindoing5462  Dit heeft letterlijk niets met ‘MSM’ te maken
    1
  4603. Yup. It's a great combination to make the world a better place.
    1
  4604. @Red Herring Cows require multiple times more of those resources to produce an equal amount of end product. Meat and dairy are intrinsically inefficient.
    1
  4605.  @johndevries6962  Wat een onzin. Veehouderij is niet van deze tijd.
    1
  4606. Je hebt duidelijk geen flauw idee. Je kunt ook gewoon zeggen dat je elektrische auto's niet leuk vindt.
    1
  4607. exactly
    1
  4608.  @realmamal  👍🏻
    1
  4609. Hydrogen cars do have batteries.
    1
  4610.  @sigma_kappa  Yes and buffering in order to provide a higher power output at acceleration.
    1
  4611.  @miguellopez3392  Exactly.
    1
  4612.  @petesmitt  Nevertheless they are the best solution to store electric energy.
    1
  4613. Meh weight does not influence range a lot.
    1
  4614. We hebben nog 10 jaar.
    1
  4615. Lol that’s impossible, and even then it would still be horribly inefficient.
    1
  4616. Everything you said is wrong lol.
    1
  4617. Hoezo? Op elektrische auto's zit geen BPM.
    1
  4618. Luc Bos Zoals je zelf inmiddels wel weet klopt dat niet. Het is circa 50.000 km.
    1
  4619. ​ @lucbos7516  Dat Duitse onderzoek sloeg helemaal nergens op. Auke Hoekstra legt uit hoe het allemaal wel zit: https://innovationorigins.com/nl/een-correctie-op-onjuiste-informatie-over-de-uitstoot-van-broeikasgassen-door-elektrische-voertuigen-auke-hoekstras-reactie-op-de-berekeningen-van-damien-ernst/ En moderne accu's gaan zonder problemen een paar ton mee, dus dat argument is niet meer actueel.
    1
  4620. Sure, but that doesn't mean that you have to fuel cars with it.
    1
  4621. Je hebt je er duidelijk nooit in verdiept. Het is al vaak genoeg lang en breed berekend. Elektrisch rijden is beter - ongeacht de manier van opwekking van elektriciteit.
    1
  4622.  @peerke59  Nee hoor. De productieuitstoot van de accu heb je zo rond de halve ton km's gecompenseerd. Daarnaast doel jij waarschijnlijk op de winning van kobalt in Afrika. Slechts een klein gedeelte van de beschikbare kobalt komt uit twijfelachtige bronnen. Een van de grootverbruikers van kobalt is de olie- en gasindustrie die het gebruikt om benzine en diesel te reinigen. Een ander gedeelte wordt gebruikt voor het fabriceren van lithium-ionaccus die a l sinds jaar en dag in elke mobiele telefoon en laptop zitten en - ja- ook in accu's voor elektrische auto's. Kobalt in accu's is echter op z'n retour en zal in de toekomst helemaal verleden tijd zijn.
    1
  4623. There is more than enough lithium on earth than we will ever need.
    1
  4624. EVs 👍🏻
    1
  4625.  @ROkkstar1687  why not?
    1
  4626. Just because you don’t like something doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist
    1
  4627. 415556 student Nee, corona is slechts een tijdelijke oplossing. De snelheidsbeperking permanent.
    1
  4628. It’s not.
    1
  4629.  @zhangwei4622  ?
    1
  4630. zijn ze niet.
    1
  4631. Electricity already is, depending on where you live, heavily taxed.
    1
  4632.  @AHR_James  That is not very high indeed. Here in the Netherlands tax on electricity is about 50%.
    1
  4633. Battery drain is completely negligible. And obviously loads of energy is used to power the tanker truck that transports the fuel…
    1
  4634.  @billcichoke2534  Battery drain = losing charge while the car is parked and turned off.
    1
  4635.  @billcichoke2534  Like I said: battery drain is negligible.
    1
  4636.  @billcichoke2534  Please elaborate
    1
  4637. Refineries can be tuned to produce more or less of a certain product. Eventually diesel and gasoline will decline and refineries will slowly disappear.
    1
  4638. Inefficient
    1
  4639. A bit better than ICE but much worse than battery.
    1
  4640. Sometimes, sometimes not. Not all farming is necessary.
    1
  4641.  @JarJarWookie  We could do with far and far less meat and dairy for example.
    1
  4642.  @JarJarWookie  My point is that not all forms of agriculture deserve subsidies as they are very polluting.
    1
  4643. Therefore wind is just as important + interconnected grids + storage.
    1
  4644. Has nothing to do with EVs. And good luck making your own gasoline by the way.
    1
  4645. This is about the 'fuel', not about the construction of the vehicle.
    1
  4646. A mix of sources of course. But that is not really relevant. Driving electric is always less polluting.
    1
  4647. Yeah because it is impossible due to physics
    1
  4648. Cars that run on air are horribly inefficient and would thus require much more electricity than any EV ever will.
    1
  4649. 😂😂
    1
  4650. Spreek voor je zelf.
    1
  4651.  @darrenpardoe  I know, but the difference has become relatively small compared to a few years ago.
    1
  4652. But that requires it to be cooled down to -250 degrees Celcius. Takes LOTS of energy.
    1
  4653. Goed verhaal, maar elektrisch rijden is niet onlosmakelijk verbonden aan 100% duurzame energie. Ook als we nog decennia lang een hoog percentage kolenstroom blijven gebruiken is het efficiënter, schoner en aangenamer om elektrisch te rijden. Het is gewoonweg niet meer van deze tijd om iedereen z'n eigen pruttelmotertje mee te laten slepen.
    1
  4654. Sure.
    1
  4655. Dat is niet echt relevant.
    1
  4656.  @jarnomommersteeg3979  Praktisch alle dingen en activiteiten in de wereld worden direct of indirect mogelijk gemaakt door olie. Het doel van de rechtzaak is juist dat het makkelijker wordt om op een duurzamere manier te leven.
    1
  4657.  @oroget9211  'wij kunnen geen verandering teweeg brengen, Shell wel.' Dat beweer ik niet. Het moet zowel van de producent als de consument komen. De rechtzaak zorgt er voor dat Shell meer zal gaan inzetten op alternatieven zoals het uitbreiden van hun laadstations langs snelwegen. Op die manier worden alternatieven aantrekkelijker voor consumenten.
    1
  4658.  @oroget9211  Nee, ik zeg dat bijna alles wat je doet en koopt direct of indirect mogelijk wordt gemaakt door olie. Het zou dus raar zijn als de mensen die de rechtzaak hebben opgestart (waar jij het over hebt) eerst hun leven zodanig moeten omvormen dat dit niet het geval meer is, voordat ze aan de rechtzaak hadden mogen beginnen. Mijn reactie was dat dit niet relevant is aangezien het 1) praktisch onmogelijk zou zijn en 2) de gevolgen van de rechtzaak vele malen groter zullen zijn dan hun eigen olieconsumptie.
    1
  4659. Yes, American reporting is so unbelievably cringeworthy. It’s a pity because the subject and overall message is great.
    1
  4660. Lol
    1
  4661. You think emissions are not a problem?
    1
  4662. Electric is always cleaner..
    1
  4663. Nope
    1
  4664. For most applications fully electric is far better.
    1
  4665. You clearly have not clue about the environmental effects of gasoline and diesel production and usage.
    1
  4666. You sir are correct. This is the number one reason driving on hydrogen is a stupid idea.
    1
  4667. The oil industry is one of the biggest consumers of cobalt.
    1
  4668.  @autodigitvlogs  ICEs will eventually be banned.
    1
  4669. Enjoy it as long as you can.
    1
  4670. Nee, waterstof is hopeloos inefficiënt.
    1
  4671. you have no idea
    1
  4672. Madelief Dallie Nee. De boeren hebben allang, in stilte, aangegeven dat de berekeningen van het RIVM gewoon kloppen.
    1
  4673. Incorrect. There is simply not nearly enough arable land for global ethanol consumption.
    1
  4674.  @itabiritomg  just use google. Plenty of research is available. Even the small amounts of bio fuels we use today have a huge impact on agriculture and nature.
    1
  4675. Battery chemistries are good enough already.
    1
  4676. And that is excluding production emissions. Total number is > 3 million tonnes of CO2.
    1
  4677. Yup, most likely paid advertisement. There is simply no other way to explain this scientifically incorrect video
    1
  4678.  @stadtjer689  fout
    1
  4679.  @rotterdammer-  Haha ja als iets je niet bevalt dan is wetenschap opeens niet meer geldig en ga je ‘zelf onderzoek doen’. Goed verhaal.
    1
  4680.  @rotterdammer-  Tuurlijk, maar in dit geval gaat het gewoon om grootschalige wereldwijde consensus.
    1
  4681.  @rotterdammer-  Onzin. Het ‘tegengeluid’ is simpelweg te belachelijk om grootschalig geaccepteerd te worden.
    1
  4682.  @gxjovi4410  Hoezo zouden we? Door de hoge vaccinatiegraad is de IC bezetting inderdaad hoog, maar wel veel minder hoog dan hij anders geweest zou zijn. Uiteraard dient over een tijdje het privilegevereiste opgeschoven te worden voor mensen die een booster hebben.
    1
  4683.  @VolatileHunter2  Leuke anecdote
    1
  4684. This was already tried in the past (look up Better Place on wikipedia). Didn't work out because battery swapping stations are expensive to build and maintain. It was not competitive with fast charging already years ago. We are past that point.
    1
  4685. How is hydrogen made? It requires three times as much electric energy.
    1
  4686. It’s not. And the only thing that can be reused from existing fuel stations is the canopy and the shop... It’s far easier to build fast chargers.
    1
  4687.  @LynxEng  correct, but that is the one and only advantage.
    1
  4688.  @LynxEng  The car is only marginally lighter than a comparable EV. Charging times are no problem in real life as it mostly happens at night and during long road trips you need breaks anyway. A battery/hydrogen hybrid sounds cool on paper but is quite useless. The added fuel tanks and cells add weight, take up space and are expensive. Could as well just have added more batteries to the vehicle.
    1
  4689.  @LynxEng  Public chargers of course. This is very normal around where I live.
    1
  4690.  @LynxEng  Simply chargers in the street and yes, also at apartment blocks. The number of chargers is in ratio with the number of EVs and is expanded on a daily basis. Look up The Netherlands.
    1
  4691. Hydrogen has never been promising because it is simply too inefficient.
    1
  4692.  @arad907  Investing in hydrogen will never improve its efficiency considerably. Hydrogen for passenger cars is a dead end road.
    1
  4693.  @arad907  Basic thermodynamics.
    1
  4694. Infrastructure is basically there, only needs some re-enforcement and installation of charging stations. Current battery tech does not require to charge on a daily basis, just like petrol cars.
    1
  4695. yes they are
    1
  4696. Waterstof wordt al decennia lang in grote hoeveelheden gebruikt in de industrie, voornamelijk voor de productie van kunstmest.
    1
  4697. Ryan B Cushman Insanely inefficient.
    1
  4698. Nope. Too complicated and batteries will soon be so cheap that nobody wants anything to do with hydrogen.
    1
  4699. Until they realize that they only drive a few hundred miles per day which is easily possible in an EV.
    1
  4700. To a certain degree yes. Anything that is mass produced is bad for the environment. Bottom line is that EVs are way better than diesel or gasoline cars.
    1
  4701.  @inibrasiumthefirst2680  No problem.
    1
  4702. Those DC-AC conversion losses are absolutely nothing compared to the losses in hydrogen production, storage, transportation and fuel cell conversion.
    1
  4703. Die kun je gewoon nog een paar jaar in stationaire accu's gebruiken (in gebouwen) en daarna gewoon recyclen. Ze zijn dus best wel groen.
    1
  4704. Nobody is forcing anybody to buy an EV.
    1
  4705. LOL
    1
  4706. The point is that renewable electricity is A LOT better than the fossil alternative. Everything we do always causes some CO2 emissions. The goal is to lower them as much as possible.
    1
  4707. Adam.75au It’s the average emissions per kWh that counts.
    1
  4708.  @ericlotze7724  Sure, but those systems have a terribly low efficiency.
    1
  4709.  @redrock861 You are just trying to come up with reasons not to feel bad burning petrol.
    1
  4710. ​ @redrock861  But still you are bothered by the fact that EVs use SOME fossil generated electricity...
    1
  4711.  @redrock861  It's not an unnecessary detour. Life cycle emissions of an EV are already a lot lower than a comparable car on gasoline or diesel. This effect will increase even more when renewable energy development increases further.
    1
  4712. HHO is super inefficient. Solar on car roof tops is by far not enough to charge a car.
    1
  4713.  @waitingforthereturn  😂
    1
  4714. Yeah but not for road vehicles.
    1
  4715. ⁠ @H78-fk2zp  Est gibt jetzt schon viel und viel mehr sauberen Strom als es jemals sauberen Diesel geben wird.
    1
  4716.  @H78-fk2zp  und in Deutschland nur 50%
    1
  4717. Never heard of fast chargers?
    1
  4718.  @ivorjohn3016  But much more efficient and in daily life you don't need to stop for charging at all. Charging happens at night.
    1
  4719.  @ivorjohn3016  Charging infrastructure will improve all over the world. Just a matter of time. A 7 hour trip is how far? 700 kilometer? A modern EV does 350 km on a full charge and you obviously start off with a full battery. So after 3,5 hours you have to stop for a fast charge of about half an hour. And maybe another one 2 hours later (short stop of say 15 minutes). You will see that the difference between a combustion engine car and a modern EV is very small because you always have to take 1 or 2 breaks anyway. Battery production cost is a whole different story, but the prices of EVs have been falling drastically over the past years and this will continue to do so.
    1
  4720.  @ivorjohn3016  It's just a matter of time. Some parts of the world follow later. Hydrogen infrastructure is much harder and more expensive to build because you have to store and transport very high pressure gas in a safe way. But much more important is that hydrogen is waaay too inefficient to be a viable solution. I do not see natural gas as a solution as CO2 emissions are about just as high as any other fossil fuel.
    1
  4721.  @ivorjohn3016  I did not ignore it. What is your point? Like I said, they get cheaper every year. Why are you so worried about it? And fuel cell cars are definitely not cheaper at all.
    1
  4722.  @ivorjohn3016  I did not say hydrogen will get better. It won't because laws of physics are the limiting factor. Electric has always been efficient.
    1
  4723.  @ivorjohn3016  I advise you to inform yourself a bit about the basics of physics. You will soon realise why electric vehicles have always been very efficient and why hydrogen fuel cell vehicles will never get anywhere near that level. Hint: efficiency is not the same as range. Good luck.
    1
  4724. Synthetic fuels are incredibly inefficient. Okay for aviation and possibly ships, but not for cars.
    1
  4725. Lol it’s not
    1
  4726.  @mro9466  exactly. not possible at all
    1
  4727.  @RedbadvanRijn-ft3vv  Na 20.000 tot 40.000 km heb je de productie van de accu gecompenseerd ten opzichte van een vergelijkbare auto met verbrandingsmotor. Als jij er 12 jaar over doet om die afstand te rijden heb je inderdaad gelijk.
    1
  4728. Yeah it’s pretty nice.
    1
  4729. Even then it would be much less complicated to use that same natural gas to fire a power station, capture that CO2 and then charge EVs with that energy.
    1
  4730. This has always been the case with technological development. Not a reason to stop evolving.
    1
  4731. GloryHole Productions Zeker weten.
    1
  4732. Even more inefficient.
    1
  4733. So what? Still far cleaner than burning gasoline.
    1
  4734.  @fadmap9676  until you realise that EVs are far more efficient and therefore total emissions are lower.
    1
  4735. Combustion engine cars burn far more often.
    1
  4736.  @motodave700  It is indeed more difficult but still, it is very rare. Not a reason at all not to adopt EVs.
    1
  4737. It is far from economical 😂
    1
  4738. Common misconception. Hydrogen is and remains intrinsically inefficient and unnecessarily complex compared to battery electric.
    1
  4739. Why the hate in the first place
    1
  4740. Not true. Yes storage is very important but even without storage solar makes a lot of sense.
    1
  4741.  @mxbadboy263  One of the solutions
    1
  4742. There it is again, still going strong in 2021, the Stanley Meyer scam story 😂
    1
  4743.  @merlin1346  Well it's just logical because it is impossible due to physics.
    1
  4744.  @VRrgbg genau..
    1
  4745.  @Constantin154  Sogar mit viel Fossilstrom ist elektrisch fahren besser.
    1
  4746. A kit? Doing what exactly?
    1
  4747.  @petecoo1978  The point of the zone is that the zone itself gets better air quality and that is exactly what happens.
    1
  4748.  @applekidn1  You are correct that a switch to electric cars needs to happen sooner than later. This has nothing to do with ‘scams’, it is just a matter of physics. And yes, the grid can handle this.
    1
  4749. Het punt is juist dat we helemaal geen melk nodig hebben grapjas.
    1
  4750. Wrong
    1
  4751.  @502opz346  Just google CO2 per capita of different countries.
    1
  4752. Because there is a huge shortage of transmission capacity…
    1
  4753. Public chargers along the street.
    1
  4754. En nog een wappie
    1
  4755. Electric cars are always cleaner, even on non renewable energy.
    1
  4756.  @lesklower7281  As we all know by now through extensive resereach: total life cycle emissions of an electric car are far lower than a comparable petrol or diesel car, despite the fact that their production emissions are higher.
    1
  4757. Sure, but that does not mean we should put it in cars.
    1
  4758. Of course.
    1
  4759.  @keystonerider1308  You are wrong.
    1
  4760.  @keystonerider1308  Yes I have but that is not relevant. Have you ever done emission calculations? You probably do not realize one electric car only requires 10 kg of lithium.
    1
  4761.  @buildmotosykletist1987  An EV battery lasts far longer than a hydrogen fuel cell.
    1
  4762.  @buildmotosykletist1987  Fuel cells degrade from day one. Also, your numbers are far off. They only last 300.000 km max.
    1
  4763.  @buildmotosykletist1987  Again, you are misinformed. Look it up. Fuel cells degrade.
    1
  4764.  @buildmotosykletist1987  “ Polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) fuel cells are a promising alternative, because they are clean, quiet, and operate at high efficiencies. However, challenges remain in achieving long lives due to catalyst degradation and hydrogen storage.” Youtube does not allow me to post URLs in comments but you can google this sentence.
    1
  4765. Clearly never tried one
    1
  4766. Wrong. An EV is always cleaner over the lifespan of a vehicle. Regarding mining problems in Congo (Africa): you are probably referring to cobalt, not lithium... And by the way, guess who still is one of the largest consumers of cobalt? Right, the oil industry.
    1
  4767.  @awesomealie8179  Hahahahhaha
    1
  4768. Hydrogen is stupid because it wastes insane amounts of energy.
    1
  4769. Dat is dus niet waar. Ookal rijd je op 100% grijze stroom, de CO2-uitstaat is alsnog lager. Elektriciteitscentrales en elektromotoren zijn veel efficiënter dan olieraffinages en verbrandingsmotoren.
    1
  4770. It's is even more inefficient than hydrogen electric.
    1
  4771.  @CptBerns  Losses in a combustion engine are insane. The vast majority is lost in heat.
    1
  4772. Dus? waterstof is gewoon een waardeloze oplossing voor auto's.
    1
  4773. What is your problem? Electric cars are great.
    1
  4774.  @hoffmann646  Nope
    1
  4775.  @PWIJsneus  Het is 2024. Elektrische voertuigen zijn al meer dan 10 jaar op de markt. Het is allang geen experiment meer en waterstof is allang een gepasseerd station.
    1
  4776.  @PWIJsneus  Die zijn er allang. Praktisch alle bekende vrachtwagenfabrikanten verkopen fatsoenlijke elektrische vrachtwagens die makkelijk 300+ km rijbereik hebben. De MB e-Actros en Iveco S-eWay zelfs 500km. En over personenauto’s hoeven we het helemaal niet meer te hebben.
    1
  4777. Er is werk zat, dus dat is het probleem niet. Het is hoog tijd dat vervuilende industrieën zoals de veehouderij worden afgeschaft.
    1
  4778. Not at all.
    1
  4779. ⁠ @lancedooley7558  It’s not. You are just falling for a famous conspiracy theory because you feel uncomfortable by the fact that we have to make big changes as a society to lower CO2 emissions as fast as possible.
    1
  4780. Would take too long.
    1
  4781.  @gecko2000405  CO2 emissions reduction.
    1
  4782. Hybrids don’t make more sense emissions wise.
    1
  4783.  @pdballerina  sure, but it should be the most important
    1
  4784.  @pdballerina  Of course. However, in many cases you would see that an EV will actually be cheaper. But yes, it depends on where you live.
    1
  4785. Still, even if we decide to travel a lot less we still need clean transportation for when traveling is really needed.
    1
  4786.  @MRT-co1sd  depends on the country. In many European countries EV infrastructure is great so there is no reason to switch back.
    1
  4787. Hydrogen in ICE is even worse than fuel cells.
    1
  4788.  @Joop3000  Precies, en daarom zullen dat soort installaties ook altijd helemaal achteraan sluiten in de handelsrij. De kans dat een andere partij (iets) meer bereid is te betalen voor een kWh is groot.
    1
  4789. True but but that doesn’t mean we don’t need zero emission trucks.
    1
  4790. 😂
    1
  4791. Haha not at all.
    1
  4792.  @phillipparsons8930  Hydrogen cars are barely any lighter and they require to replace the fuel cell and tanks within 10 years. They also have lithium batteries on board. Early day EVs are not representable of current battery tech.
    1
  4793.  @phillipparsons8930  They are betting against physics.
    1
  4794.  @josephE2024  "Hydrogen can be made and used on the fly for use" No it cannot lol.
    1
  4795. CNG still produces a lot of CO2.
    1
  4796. No it won't lol.
    1
  4797. ULEZ have nothing to do with climate….
    1
  4798. Batterij-elektrische auto's zijn geen tussenstop naar waterstof, lol.
    1
  4799. Matchless Dat spreekt voor zich. Maar waar wil je die elektriciteit vandaan halen?
    1
  4800. Matchless Er zal nooit voldoende reststroom zijn om een electrolyser rendabel te maken. Auto’s met accu’s worden namelijk vooral s’achts opgeladen dus die kapen de stroom weg. Bovendien zul je drie keer zoveel windmolens en zonnepanelen nodig hebben om een zelfde hoeveelheid auto’s te voorzien van waterstof. Het is uitermate inefficient.
    1
  4801. Windmolens worden een keer geplaatst, vissers schrapen dag in dag uit de bodem kapot.
    1
  4802.  @ariekuiper3270  Wel als ze vlees, zuivel of vis eten ja.
    1
  4803.  @ariekuiper3270  Krekels en meelwormen zijn ook dieren grapjas
    1
  4804. No lies at all. Just poor reporting. The main problem is lack of transmission capacity. Without it you cannot transport the electricity to the water pumps, the hydrogen factory or other states.
    1
  4805. Inpluggen in de pauze. Deze Kia komt trouwens ruim 300 km ver op een volle accu dus waarschijnlijk kunnen ze er de hele dag mee vooruit.
    1
  4806. Guess what the oil industry uses to clean your petrol. Exactly: cobalt.
    1
  4807. Doesn’t solve the CO2 problem.
    1
  4808. Great to read about your positive experience with the Lightning. It is clear that mister MGUY deliberately creates videos to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt just to generate clicks and make money through his channel. A sad business.
    1
  4809. Even more inefficient 😂
    1
  4810. Fortunately other countries will follow soon.
    1
  4811. Oil companies love hydrogen..
    1
  4812. Kabangu Kabangu jup :(
    1
  4813. So what do you propose instead?
    1
  4814. Carbon tax is the solution.
    1
  4815.  @sandelu635  Of course it is too late, but that concerns all climate measures. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t implement it.
    1
  4816. Tesla Supercharging is barely slower than hydrogen refueling and A LOT cheaper.
    1
  4817. Ze betalen sinds 1 januari wel wegenbelasting
    1
  4818. Twee L-en grapjas
    1
  4819. He was kicked out of China.
    1
  4820.  @hemanaidu221 Sorry, I was wrong. Apparently he decided to leave on its own. Check out his video 'Why I left China for Good!'.
    1
  4821. Also you will drive an EV eventually.
    1
  4822. You are wrong. Hydrogen cars are simply a bad solution due to physics.
    1
  4823. "charging their phones" LOL
    1
  4824. Exactly...
    1
  4825. ⁠ @ThavaMaths The problem is not CEOs having an opinion, the point is Elon being so vocal about it.
    1
  4826.  @Scythwolf Wrong. EV lifecycle emissions are far lower.
    1
  4827.  @ThavaMaths  Not publicly.
    1
  4828.  @serpentpigeon9108  Actually there is more than enough lithium
    1
  4829. Stop being ignorant. All data on EV life cycle emissions are easy to find. Good luck.
    1
  4830. Very unlikely. Hydrogen is simply far too inefficient and this will always remain so.
    1
  4831.  @logmeindog  It’s a bit less inefficient than ICE but far less efficient than batteries.
    1
  4832.  @logmeindog  Infrastructure does not play the biggest role at all. Hydrogen is intrinsically inefficient due to unavoidable losses in production, compression, transport and conversion in the fuel cell. These steps can be improved to a certain degree, but it will always remain very inefficient compared to batteries.
    1
  4833.  @logmeindog  Haha not at all. ESPECIALLY from a physics perspective battery electric is far more efficient.
    1
  4834. Fuel consumption does not say much about emissions. EVs are the answer. Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are stupid because they are insanely inefficient.
    1
  4835. Horribly inefficient.
    1
  4836. Hydrogen in combustion engines are even more inefficient.
    1
  4837. Informeer je voordat je weer van die onzin de comments in slingert.
    1
  4838.  @michielbosscher5179  Hahaha.
    1
  4839. Already happening.
    1
  4840. Lithium battery production is currently at about 100 kg of CO2 per kWh. Pretty good.
    1
  4841. yes it will.
    1
  4842. Nope. Hydrogen and synthetic fuels will always remain a niche for some vehicles (definitely not passenger cars). The vast majority will be battery electric.
    1
  4843. “Verbrauchs und abgasarmen” 😂😂
    1
  4844. They are not.
    1
  4845. You are mixing things up. You forgot that building a hydrogen car also requires lithium, cobalt, nickel and platinum mining. And guess what, EVs can be charged with renewable energy produced from only a fraction of that exact same wind, solar, geothermal, tidal and other sources of energy.
    1
  4846.  @honestabe4161  Yeah sure, EVs require more materials for the battery. But you need platinum for the fuel cell that also lasts shorter than a battery. Also, the battery in a fuel cell car lasts shorter because it cycles much more than an EV battery. And again, Fuel cell cars require at least three times the amount of electricity and thus cause lots more CO2. And at last: "when a EV is junked the lithium battery packs leak pollution into ground water." That is obviously pure bollocks but you know that.
    1
  4847. You forget about the energy needed for electrolysis.
    1
  4848. Hydrogen is not efficient enough.
    1
  4849. Still a lot better than oil or hydrogen.
    1
  4850. Nee man
    1
  4851. Nope
    1
  4852. About half of the comments are about this...
    1
  4853. Not at all
    1
  4854. On a daily basis an EV is always cheaper as you don’t need fast charging most of the time.
    1
  4855.  @ROSNADOR  By using overnight charging you can start every day with a full, relatively cheap, battery.
    1
  4856.  @ROSNADOR  My point was that a large part (at least 1/3rd) of your daily 1000 km trip is made on cheap electrons you put in your car at night.
    1
  4857.  @ROSNADOR  Sure, but every night you can charge cheaply again and start the next day with a full battery.
    1
  4858.  @ROSNADOR  I understand. But current generation of EVs can easily cover 1000 km in about 10 hours, including charging.
    1
  4859.  @ROSNADOR  correct
    1
  4860. Guess what, cobalt is used for refining fuels too.
    1
  4861. Niks moois aan de veehouderij.
    1
  4862. Lol not at all. Battery electric is the only sensible way forward. There is no such thing as a ‘low emitting combustion engine’.
    1
  4863.  @M-ne9ul  It (zwarte piet) does create racist associations.
    1
  4864. Lol!
    1
  4865. EV bedoel je. Niet hybride.
    1
  4866.  @secureconcepts  aah ik begrijp je nu. Treffende vergelijking.
    1
  4867. lol!
    1
  4868.  @slonold3554  Many people are just desperately scraping together reasons to keep everything the way it is.
    1
  4869. Well said
    1
  4870.  @chrisedward7575  That's because the vast majority of car brands barely produce profitable EVs. They prefer to sell combustion engine cars.
    1
  4871.  @chrisedward7575  EVs are absolutely fine for long trips with a proper charging network, it barely makes a difference with an internal combustion engine car. The situation here in Europe proves this. Also, modern EVs have absolutely no problem in cold climates.
    1
  4872.  @rickdungen  jij dacht dat er in een waterstofauto geen accu zit? 😁
    1
  4873. Both very inefficient ways to lower CO2 emissions.
    1
  4874. Reken nu maar eens uit hoe efficiënt het delven van olie en het raffineren, transporteren en verbranden van benzine en diesel is. xD
    1
  4875. Yup
    1
  4876. nice :D
    1
  4877. Soon EVs will be cheaper than hybrids.
    1
  4878. Ok wappie
    1
  4879. Never
    1
  4880. Not ironic at all.
    1
  4881. DUH if fool cells were a great ideaTeslas would have them from day one lol.
    1
  4882. gimlin101 Lol of course that was an option in 2008.
    1
  4883.  @trowawayacc  Most batteries will outlast fuel cells easily. And, as you know, hydrogen is just terribly inefficient requiring about 3 times more solar panels, wind turbines and power stations to run the same number of vehicles.
    1
  4884. Still great. Very efficient and perfectly suitable for local deliveries.
    1
  4885.  @robingroeneveld4169  De helft van de Nederlandse elektriciteit komt uit hernieuwbare bronnen. Veel beter dan diesel en benzine verbranden dus.
    1
  4886.  @robingroeneveld4169  Je verwisselt energie en elektriciteit. Biomassa is slechts voor een klein gedeelte verantwoordelijk, zonne- en windenergie leveren een veel grotere bijdrage.
    1
  4887.  @robingroeneveld4169  Nee hoor, je moet kijken naar elektriciteit, niet naar primaire energie. En ja, de transitie naar volledig elektrisch is prima haalbaar.
    1
  4888.  @robingroeneveld4169  haha
    1
  4889. Hé een wappie
    1
  4890. Sure, but even then we will still need zero emission trucks.
    1
  4891. Not relevant. They both start with electricity.
    1
  4892. No. Hydrogen is made from water AND electricity. The comparison is correct.
    1
  4893. 3-4 years *
    1
  4894. Well it's very simple: hydrogen engines make no sense at all because of their terribly low efficiency.
    1
  4895. You clearly made some mistakes in your 'deep dive'. EVs always win after less than 50.000 km of driving. What emissions for battery production did you use? What emissions for electricity production did you use? On what consumption figures did you compare the vehicles?
    1
  4896.  @Perceivedshift  EVs win EVEN if you have to buy another battery. Which is very unlikely with current battery tech.
    1
  4897.  @Perceivedshift  Haha well answer the questions in my first comment then.
    1
  4898. EVs do in fact considerably lower CO2 emissions. So no, not similar at all.
    1
  4899.  @Charliegsand  Of course I also factored in manufacturing emissions… An EV only has to last 4 years to make up for it.
    1
  4900.  @Charliegsand  Not at all. Just average mileage per year. The 200k figure is a famously outdated figure. It’s round about 40k miles in total to compensate for battery production emissions.
    1
  4901.  @Charliegsand  Again, famously outdated. You can find many far more recent research reports reporting far lower figures. The battery is by far the biggest chunk of the emissions, but obviously these life cycle emissions analyses cover everything from mining to recycling and everything in between.
    1
  4902. But it doesn’t make cars better 😂
    1
  4903. Not really. More like 1 hour.
    1
  4904.  @kstephenson9465  nice 😎
    1
  4905.  @AndrewTSq  That is exactly the same way to calculate it, only per 10 km. Even at 0,5 usd per kWh it is more or less the same price as diesel. And then there are so many more advantages of driving an EV.
    1
  4906. Does not make much sense. Diesel is relatively efficient. Hydrogen is not.
    1
  4907.  @Skreebee  If there is one person who did not do any research on the subject it is you.
    1
  4908. The Nissan Leafs are not representable for current battery technology at all. Pretty much all other EVs, especially current generation, have batteries that will last longer than the rest of the vehicle.
    1
  4909. Not when you realise that actually using that hydrogen is super inefficient. Electric cars are batteries on wheels. Perfect for grid storage.
    1
  4910. Nope. EVs actually make sense in directly lowering CO2 emissions.
    1
  4911.  @lbochtler  Nope, that is why they actually make sense. Total life cycle emissions are many times lower. Synthetic fuels are a terribly inefficient solution reserved for aviation and possibly shipping where batteries are not up for the task.
    1
  4912.  @Bobo-ox7fj  lol!
    1
  4913.  @lbochtler  It's not the media obviously (they are generally anti EV). It's just ubiquitous scientific research.
    1
  4914. Als je iets niet begrijpt is het theoretische onzin?
    1
  4915. Tesla solved that a loooong time ago.
    1
  4916. Stoppen met melk drinken dus
    1
  4917. Pieter veen Waterstof moet je ook tanken hoor 😂
    1
  4918. Would make a bad product. Hydrogen storage takes up a lot of space on board so it would result in a compromise with bad range and/or bad load capacity.
    1
  4919. Efficiency is not the same as energy density.
    1
  4920. That's called common sense.
    1
  4921.  @vd9362  Hé een wappie
    1
  4922. The knocking sound is completely normal. I drove a Transporter with 1.9D engine for a few years.
    1
  4923. You forgot about emissions.
    1
  4924. Yes, it’s a great solution for the time being.
    1
  4925. Incredible line-ups do not occur very often. Charging locations are easy to scale up. Refuelling at hydrogen stations would also cause congestion because these stations can only serve so many vehicles per hour. Hydrogen will always remain far too inefficient.
    1
  4926. So you thought that batteries, fuel tanks and fuel cells in hydrogen cars are not bad for the environment?!
    1
  4927.  @MartinRyleOShea  The Toyota Mirai has a similar lithium ion battery. It is indeed smaller, but will need replacing much earlier due to the much higher number of cycles it has to go through.
    1
  4928.  @MartinRyleOShea  The problem is that the hunger for energy of a hydrogen car is much more harmful. The electricity emissions per kilometer are three times higher than an EV.
    1
  4929.  @MartinRyleOShea  Yeah that is a cool island but it does not solve the efficiency problem. You will need three times as many wind turbines if we all went for hydrogen cars.
    1
  4930. So what do you propose to lower CO2 emissions?
    1
  4931. Hydrogen will play a smaller role.
    1
  4932. period?
    1
  4933. Nothing lasts forever. We will always need new stuff eventually. And by the way, driving an old car long enough causes a lot more CO2 emissions than building an EV.
    1
  4934. Not true. For day to day balancing current battery technology is very capable. Price is coming down massively too.
    1
  4935.  @alsmith1776  Yes. Reality literally proves you wrong.
    1
  4936. lol every thing you claim is incorrect. inform yourself.
    1
  4937. Het probleem met aardolie en -gas is dat het kool-waterstoffen zijn waardoor er bij verbranding uiteraard CO2 ontstaat. Dat is bij pure (ook fossiele) waterstof niet het geval.
    1
  4938.  @grtxyz4358  Dat klinkt inderdaad als een realistisch scenario.
    1
  4939. Lol as if you do not need materials for hydrogen cars.
    1
  4940.  @stevenstidham13  Hydrogen cars have lithium ion batteries for energy buffering.
    1
  4941.  @stevenstidham13  Combustion engines on hydrogen are out of the question.
    1
  4942.  @stevenstidham13  Of course hydrogen fuel cell vehicles use less lithium (and cobalt and nickel) than EVs, but their batteries last shorter because they cycle a lot more. Plus, and that is the of course most important part, they consume three times the amount of energy which makes them useless when it comes to lowering CO2 emissions as fast as possible.
    1
  4943.  @stevenstidham13  Water is not the problem at all. There is absolutely no need to collect it. You don’t need a combustion engine to do that by the way, fuel cells also emit water.
    1
  4944.  @stevenstidham13  Large scale centralized storage of energy in the form of hydrogen could indeed be an option in the future. Using it in vehicles is just stupid because it is horribly inefficient.
    1
  4945. But P2G is even more inefficiënt than hydrogen so that will make it a lot harder to reach net zero. Battery electric is the way to go for the vast majority of vehicles.
    1
  4946. Efficiency, simplicity.
    1
  4947. Production energy is pretty low within the complete life cycle analysis.
    1
  4948. More like worst of both worlds.
    1
  4949. Als Shell zorgt voor meer beschikbaarheid van duurzame alternatieven dan zal de vraag dalen. Bijvoorbeeld snelladers langs de snelwegen.
    1
  4950. Of course he won't give it 'a fair shot'. Hydrogen is a terrible technology for road vehicles and will never become less inefficient due to some simple laws of physics. It's hopeless and Elon already knew that 10 years ago.
    1
  4951.  @laronda10  Energy efficiency.
    1
  4952.  @laronda10  We are talking passenger cars here. Not forklifts. Energy efficiency is what counts if we want to get to zero emission vehicles as fast as possible.
    1
  4953. They are not extremely toxic and their lifespan is not extremely limited. Proper EV batteries easily last 10+ years. Not comparable to phone batteries at all.
    1
  4954. Fully electric is always far more favorable, even when it comes to the required natural resources.
    1
  4955. It's not relevant. Solar panels have a carbon payback time of about 1,5 years and they last at least 25 years.
    1
  4956.  @darrenpat182  Waste is not the same as emissions.
    1
  4957. Pat Rick Again, it is not relevant. Total emissions go down so that is what counts.
    1
  4958. Pat Rick Well nuclear is another story with it’s own disadvantages. Will definitely play a role indeed. The point is, we need current energy (that could be carbon intense) to build low carbon solutions. There is no way around that. Building hundreds of nuclear power stations is also very carbon intense.
    1
  4959. Wrong. Inform yourself.
    1
  4960.  @crazyewok8742  1. I don’t think Norway claims to be ofsetting a certain amount. The point is simple: more EVs = always better. 2. As has been a well researched and therefore well-known fact for years: lifecycle emissions of EVs are always lower than comparable ICE cars, obviously including the battery production emissions.
    1
  4961. They will be reused and eventually recycled in large recycling facilities. And no, they do not live short.
    1
  4962.  @RealButcher  Yes really. Yes, in stationary applications because they do not require very high power cycling so that is absolutely fine. This is already being done. Recycling plants barely exist because there is barely supply of used EV batteries. Proper batteries will outlast the vehicle itself.
    1
  4963. haha!
    1
  4964. This vehicle will tow just as fine as a proper EV.
    1
  4965. Toch levert een windturbine heel veel duurzame energie op waar we allemaal profijt van hebben.
    1
  4966. They didn’t invent anything. It was from the beginning clear that hydrogen was a terrible idea.
    1
  4967. Hydrogen cars don’t have internal combustion engines. They have electric motors and fuel cells.
    1
  4968. EV's are much less likely to catch fire than a fossil car.
    1
  4969. That is a common misconception. EVs were efficient from day 1. Hydrogen cars will ALWAYS remain inefficient due to simple laws of physics.
    1
  4970.  @matthieurenvoise5578  Not really. Current high end EVs can drive just as far as hydrogen cars and are not much heavier.
    1
  4971.  @matthieurenvoise5578  550 km is close enough to me and the Tesla Model S does 600+ km too. And even more important: these cars drive the same distance while consuming only a fraction of the electric energy. Also: hydrogen cars will probably not get significant bigger driving ranges as this would require even larger hydrogen tanks or even higher pressure inside the tanks which lowers the efficiency even further...
    1
  4972.  @matthieurenvoise5578  The tanks are much bigger than that, you are confusing liters with kilograms. Bigger tanks would simply not fit in the cars. And no, the weight of the batteries does not really impact the energy consumption. Weight is only a small factor. Decent EVs are absolutely perfect for long distance driving, no need for fuel cell cars and definitely not in the future. It's simply game over for hydrogen. It might remain a niche for heavy trucking and shipping. Not for passenger cars.
    1
  4973.  @matthieurenvoise5578  The tanks are big. The Toyota Mirai has a total tank capacity of 142 liters.
    1
  4974. Lol. Nope
    1
  4975. Erm no
    1
  4976.  @janw4725  nope, about 4 million these days
    1
  4977.  @janw4725  you are so clueless to think these subjects are in any way related. Also, dairy and meat cows are both bad.
    1
  4978.  @HuYou-bs5rz  All early Teslas came without heat pump.
    1
  4979. Onderzoek per persoon? Hoe stel je je dat in hemelsnaam voor? En vaccins dragen inderdaad bij aan meer vrijheid voor een zo groot mogelijke groep mensen, dus dat is een uitstekende redenering. Zouden meer mensen moeten doen.
    1
  4980.  @primafacie588  Je vindt de realiteit gewoon ongemakkelijk en gaat daarom op zoek naar samenzweringstheorieën.
    1
  4981.  @primafacie588  De overheid neemt slechts verstandige maatregelen en zou er nooit op uit zijn om u doelbewust vrijheid te ontnemen.
    1
  4982.  @primafacie588  Dan zijn we het op dat vlak eens. Vaccineren is echter wel onderdeel van de noodzakelijke aanpak.
    1
  4983. The comparison is completely valid. And no, the Model Y does not cost 80k. They cost 45k.
    1
  4984. Pretty much any vehicle will be electric in the future.
    1
  4985. It's not a source.
    1
  4986.  @Mr_Boss_Smile  Proper LEDs are not expensive. It’s 2024, not 2004.
    1
  4987. @ myths
    1
  4988.  @frankwiersma7980  En diervriendelijk is het ook nauwelijks.
    1
  4989. Not efficient enough
    1
  4990. Nope, it’s just VW being reluctant acting on it.
    1
  4991. Not enough biomass
    1
  4992. Lol and you are the prime example why these FUD youtube videos are so damaging.
    1
  4993. Of course. Nobody will deny that. But if you really need a car, the EV is a much better choice. It's all relative.
    1
  4994.  @velokernow3696  Old cars will just be replaced by modern ones in a natural way. Exactly like it has always been. The only difference is the electric drive train.
    1
  4995.  @velokernow3696  Except for emissions. That’s the key thing.
    1
  4996.  @velokernow3696  Nope, total emissions of EVs are much lower. That’s the whole point. And of course will older vehicles be exported to other parts of the world. What is the problem? There they will replace even older cars and eventually electric vehicles will also make their way down there.
    1
  4997.  @velokernow3696  Cobalt is used in large numbers by the oil industry for refinery processes of diesel and gasoline.. And yes, of course it’s best not to have a car. Everyone knows that. But IF you need one, it’s best to choose an electric one. And by the way, within 10 years there won’t be a choice at all to make. All new cars will be electric.
    1
  4998. En zeer terecht. Iedereen verdient schone lucht.
    1
  4999. Not at all. Statistics show that batteries last far longer than expected and fires are very rare compared to combustion engine cars.
    1
  5000. A Tesla fills up when you sleep.
    1
  5001.  @anttilaiho7801  It takes so long because it can and because it is cheaper. You can also choose to fast charge.
    1
  5002. Antti Laiho I see what you mean, but plugging in at home and/or at work still feels a lot more convenient to me.
    1
  5003. Het doel van een milieuzone is om LOKALE luchtkwaliteit te verbeteren. Waarom is dat zo moeilijk te begrijpen?
    1
  5004. Efficiency...
    1
  5005. ​ @clivefrear1784  Battery electric is far more efficient than hydrogen fuel cells. There is no doubt about that. A hydrogen fuel cell car consumes three times the amount of electrical energy. So it's therefore not an option. Running combustion engines on hydrogen is even worse and out of the question. Battery swapping has been tried in the past bus is simply not competitive to fast charging.
    1
  5006.  @clivefrear1784  Range is barely better compared to proper EVs. It won't be long before EVs have larger ranges than the Mirai. Most people charge overnight so charging time is 0. I am saying that a hydrogen car is so inefficient that it uses three times more energy. This is unaccaptable in a a time in which we have to use as little energy as we can. Public charging along the street is easy and safe. Works great where I live. Regarding child labour: you are probably referring to cobalt. It is true that a minority of all cobalt comes from questionable sources but this has nothing to do with EVs in particular. The oil industry for example is one of the biggest consumers of cobalt for use in the desulphurisation process of petrol and diesel. Batteries from EVs will simply be reused and eventually recycled after the vehicle's life has ended.
    1
  5007.  @clivefrear1784  Not much to agree or disagree on.. It's just simple physics. Current Tesla Model S has an equal range as the Mirai and uses only a third of the energy (and thus cost). And again: public chargers along the street work fine.
    1
  5008.  @clivefrear1784  I did not claim public EV chargers are everywhere already. I just said that they are a great solution and work fine where I live. It's not really relevant whether the VAT on electricity increases or not. I would say it is unlikely because electricity is used for various purposes so it would be illogical to increase it because tax income from car fuels decreases. There are various ways for the government to make up for the decrease of tax income on fossil fuels. Why would you worry about that? Mass adoption of EVs is important for emission reduction, the fact that it is cheaper is just nice to have. Battery recycling will be fine and currently barely exists due to a lack of large amounts of used EV batteries. Batteries will first be reused in stationary applications and after that recycled. There are many companies preparing for a well functioning recycling ecosystem which makes total sense because the used batteries are full of valuable materials. Look up Redwood Materials.
    1
  5009. They are pretty good for daily energy fluctuations.
    1
  5010.  @Bryan46162  yup!
    1
  5011.  @SweBeach2023  ICE cars are losing marketshare, not Tesla.
    1
  5012. EVs will play a vital role in lowering CO2 emissions and therefore in mitigating climate change.
    1
  5013.  @BubblesTheCat1  Wrong. Even on coal electricity driving electric is cleaner. Road transportation is a big chunk of total CO2 emissions. Electrification needs to happen as fast as possible. This accounts passenger cars, vans and trucks.
    1
  5014. Veeboeren verdienen geen respect.
    1
  5015. @Wouter, ja dat heeft ie.
    1
  5016.  @dexterdrake1734  Not when you use a heat pump.
    1
  5017. It's not.
    1
  5018. CO2.
    1
  5019. Dat boeit niet.
    1
  5020.  @YraxZovaldo  Dat getal zal veel lager liggen.
    1
  5021. Only be weight, not by volume.
    1
  5022. Hydrogen is super inefficient and also heavy. Battery electric is the only sensible option.
    1
  5023.  @frank.l181  What are you talking about? Everyone knows hydrogen cars are inefficient due to physics. The Mirai consumes three times as much electric energy as a comparable EV. Pretty much all manufacturers are currently focussing on EV (yes, even Toyota). It’s a done deal. Ships and aircraft: yes. Pretty much everything else: nope.
    1
  5024.  @frank.l181  Lol in that case they have nothing to worry about.
    1
  5025. We first need to mine massive amounts to be able to retrieve enough by recycling. We are talking decades of mining here.
    1
  5026.  @Cacatoes34  They don't claim to be CO2 free. EVs cause much less CO2. That is what it is all about. Also: the oil industry is one of the biggest consumers of cobalt.
    1
  5027. You drive 300 miles without a break?
    1
  5028.  @thetide1070  Why don’t you look at the crash test ratings you talked about yourself. EVs are very safe.
    1
  5029. Not really. Petrol and diesel are fairly close to each other when it comes to efficiency. Battery and hydrogen are miles apart.
    1
  5030. Nee, waterstof en ethanol zijn geen fatsoenlijke brandstoffen.
    1
  5031. Any used low mileage EV is a great choice.
    1
  5032. Not necessary at all as most batteries will outlive the rest of the vehicle.
    1
  5033. Ok wappie 😂
    1
  5034. Zolang dat plaatsvindt in dunner bevolkte gebieden is dat positief.
    1
  5035. Because hydrogen does not make sense.
    1
  5036. Eén grote shit show inderdaad.
    1
  5037. The comparison is correct. They BOTH start with the same electricity so the power production emissions are not relevant.
    1
  5038.  @TheBooban  cluelessness to the max
    1
  5039. Charging is standardized.
    1
  5040. The sales of diesel car will simply be banned.
    1
  5041. In a world in which CO2 emissions have to be lowered as fast as possible efficiency is top priority.
    1
  5042. Hydrogen makes zero sense for passenger cars.
    1
  5043. That’s about 0,4 kWh per m2 per day. So 11 kWh per day for the whole surface hour. This equals to about 3 km of range when converted to hydrogen.
    1
  5044. CUBETechie Not worth it in my opinion.
    1
  5045. En door de enorme schaal ook de meest vervuilende veehouders ter wereld.
    1
  5046.  @gaitn5670  Vanzelfsprekend zal het gepaard moeten gaan met een grootschalige omschakeling naar het consumeren van plantaardige eiwitten. En ja, molentjes en zonnepaneeltjes zijn veel belangrijker. En voor jouw idee: grootschalige veeteelt draagt juist bij aan voedseltekorten in arme gedeeltes van de wereld.
    1
  5047.  @MoogKorgfan  En jij bent een wappie. Ach ach.
    1
  5048. Diesel 😂
    1
  5049.  @sakispsinakis  Proposing diesel as a solution is funny
    1
  5050.  @sakispsinakis  As you probably know, the whole point is that burning diesel creates loads of CO2 every kilometer you drive, during the whole lifespan of the car. Building an electric car also causes CO2 and the electricity to charge it as well, but the overal lifecycle emissions are far lower than a comparable gasoline or diesel car. There is LOTS of scientific proof EVs are less polluting.
    1
  5051.  @sakispsinakis  I see what you mean but it also feels a bit exegarated. I assume you are talking about an Audi Q4 35? You owned one? Charging at home or down the street is obviously a must have when owning any EV. It will just be a matter of time if there are not enough public chargers around your house. Getting stuck on the motorway is not something to be worried of because you can run the heater for many hours because you are not idling like an internal combustion engine car would do. Anyway, all not valid reasons to propose a 'diesel hybrid' as a better solution than an EV.
    1
  5052. Sure but not for vehicles.
    1
  5053. There is no electricity shortage at all. Electric cars are great and so will be vans in the near future.
    1
  5054. Not enough cooking oil
    1
  5055. 80 km/h* Great explanation by the way.
    1
  5056. Lol you are so clueless
    1
  5057. "The electrical grid in the U.S., WHICH CANNOT BE REPLACED BY WIND OR SOLAR, run by BURNING COAL" so which electricity do you plan to use for hydrogen production? lol
    1
  5058. No Bozos But you would need al least four times the amount of nuclear power stations for hydrogen cars.
    1
  5059. ​ @no-bozos  You would still only need a third of that same nuclear energy to power BEVs.
    1
  5060. No Bozos I am not saying I am completely against nuclear. I am saying Hydrogen cars are dumb. Building a nuclear power plant is insanely expensive and takes many years. I repeat: if we all went over to hydrogen cars we would need to build at least three times the amount of nuclear power stations. Battery electric vehicles are the fastest and most efficient way of getting away from fossil fuels.
    1
  5061.  @no-bozos  Not really. Electrolysis is only one of the several steps in the hydrogen ecosystem that cause major losses of energy. There is compression, transport and conversion in the fuel cell as well. It will therefore not get anywhere near the efficiency of a battery.
    1
  5062.  @no-bozos  The video is accurate. You don't need to include the losses of burning the fuel that is used for electricity production because hydrogen also starts with electricity.
    1
  5063.  @no-bozos  What is so hard about my last sentence?
    1
  5064.  @no-bozos  Why do you start about nuclear again? It is not relevant. The discussion is about hydrogen vs. battery. They both start with electricity.
    1
  5065. hé een wappie
    1
  5066.  @Links_knuppelen  Heel simpel: als iemand iets zegt dat totaal niets met de werkelijkheid te maken heeft en direct zinspeelt op complottheorieën is die vrijwel zeker een wappie.
    1
  5067. There is no family that drives more than 200 miles without taking a break.
    1
  5068. ‘These technologies’ meaning what? Hydrogen is not an energy source.
    1
  5069.  @charlieng3347  You said 'until we have these technologies.' Which technologies are you talking about?
    1
  5070. It takes A LOT of solar to ‘crack water’...
    1
  5071.  @yokemonkey  At what pressure and voltage?
    1
  5072.  @yokemonkey  You mean about 10 bar?
    1
  5073.  @yokemonkey  1,5 L of hydrogen at 10 bar pressure is about 1,3 grams. 1 kilogram of hydrogen delivers 33 kWh of energy. So 1,3 grams of hydrogen = 0,04 kWh of energy, or 40 Wh. Your generator running for 1 minute at 12 A and 11,5 V consumes 2,3 Wh. This can never be the case as you will always need to input at least as much as you would output (actually a lot more due to all the losses). Are you sure of that 10 bar? And how do you compress the hydrogen?
    1
  5074. And they will remain so ^^
    1
  5075.  @victorkeck  EVs are and will remain much better
    1
  5076.  @victorkeck  EVs will always be MUCH more efficient and therefore cheap per mile and causing less CO2 emissions.
    1
  5077. ​ @gissit1967  It is clear that you sir have never done any proper research yourself on this subject. Cobalt is on its way out as an important anode material. Other metals like lithium and nickel are pretty easily available. Also: how do you think hydrogen fuel cell cars are going to fix this problem? They also require large amounts of comparable materials.
    1
  5078.  @gissit1967  Of course I know the actual footprint of producing EVs and battery packs. Otherwise I wouldn't be making these clear statements. There is some very extensive and solid research material available if you are interested.
    1
  5079. That is just whataboutism. There are many solutions needed. Lab grown meat is one of them.
    1
  5080. Haha finally!
    1
  5081. Ehh that is exactly what is happening and it still is a terrible solution 😂
    1
  5082.  @Arkane117  impossible due to physics
    1
  5083. It’s perfectly scalable.
    1
  5084. Best way to spend the money
    1
  5085. Nope
    1
  5086. That's a common misconception. Hydrogen cars are intrinsically inefficient. It is not a matter of scale.
    1
  5087. Guess what has been done over the past decades (and still is being done)? Massive amounts of research towards batteries. Lithium ion is and will remain the best solution for a long time.
    1
  5088. 2 years?! Lol
    1
  5089. It is not. Far too inefficient.
    1
  5090. Nice example of whataboutism
    1
  5091. Lol yeah and where comes hydrogen from? Driving electric is always cleaner, no matter the source of the electricity.
    1
  5092. En jij denkt dat Prins Autogas een onafhankelijke bron is? 😂
    1
  5093. Monique Plausibel is een understatement denk ik :p
    1
  5094.  @Simmonique  Ik richtte mij richting C.J, zie zijn eerste bericht hierboven waar hij of zij verwijst naar Prins Autogas.
    1
  5095. Uiteraard is die hernieuwbare energie niet voorhanden voor zoveel waterstof. Dat is eigenlijk een nog veel belangrijker argument om het niet te doen.
    1
  5096. what are you mumbling about?
    1
  5097. Dude, hydrogen starts with the exact same electricity. That's the whole point....
    1
  5098. .. but they are wrong.
    1
  5099. No bias, just a proper understanding of physics and data.
    1
  5100.  @StuartLomas  Exactly!
    1
  5101. You are misquoting the study. The break even point is only 60k miles in a worst case scenario. An average school bus drives 12k miles per year so within 5 years the electric bus is cleaner on every level.
    1
  5102. EVs are still better.
    1
  5103. Liza Poorters Lees mijn eerste reactie hierboven.
    1
  5104.  @That-Guy_ yup
    1
  5105.  @natesnacks7829  You would need an external power source like a battery. A really big battery. Otherwise it would be an perpetuum mobile.
    1
  5106. Not true. Elon already was very successful years ago.
    1
  5107.  @tvb4227  not in this case
    1
  5108. LOL, in order to make what? The most inefficient vehicle in the world?
    1
  5109.  @spaceman4294  adding an alternator to a driving car increases the amount of energy it needs to go forward. So the car would actually use more energy in stead of creating any.
    1
  5110. It's not a hype lol
    1
  5111. Lol what do you propose? A combustion engine?!
    1
  5112. Nice renderings lol
    1
  5113. Hou op met die onzin. Er zijn geen 'verborgen gehouden technologieën'.
    1
  5114. Miguel lopez Exactly
    1
  5115. Milieuzones gaan niet om CO2. Het is er op gericht lokale luchtkwaliteit te verbeteren dus dan hebben we het over stikstofoxide, fijnstof en roet. HVO en ethanol lossen dit probleem niet op. Los daarvan kan er nooit genoeg van deze brandstoffen gemaakt worden. Elektrische auto’s blijven daarom de beste oplossing.
    1
  5116.  @brattikx777  Tuurlijk, maar meestal niet realistisch.
    1
  5117. explain yourself.
    1
  5118.  @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
  5119.  @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
  5120. ​ @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
  5121.  @radiocrash  Sure, but hydrogen is simply highly unlikely because it is so damn inefficient.
    1
  5122.  @radiocrash  The article also admits it is not a viable option for passenger cars.
    1
  5123.  @radiocrash  This will remain so. Fuel cell tech can never catch up with batteries due to laws of physics.
    1
  5124. EU has been massively switching to EVs and heat pumps since the Russian invasion.
    1
  5125. In Duitsland is er veel minder veehouderij in verhouding tot het landoppervlakte.
    1
  5126.  @Daniel-o7s1f  Simpelweg niet waar. Duitsland houdt zich aan exact dezelfde stikstofregels, het zijn immers Europese wetten waar alle landen zich aan dienen te houden. Nogmaals, de veel lagere veehouderij-dichtheid maakt het daar een minder groot probleem.
    1
  5127.  @vandeberg649  Ja het is allemaal een samenzwering van het WEF om het volk te onderdrukken 🤡
    1
  5128. Klopt. Maar het is natuurlijk voor Ameland. En dan heb je het al over 1/3 van het aantal huishoudens. Veel zware industrie heb je daar niet vermoed ik.
    1
  5129. They. Both. Start. With. Electricity.....
    1
  5130. It’s not. It’s simply a matter of technological advancement.
    1
  5131. Several different methods
    1
  5132.  @fishmonger6879  It will be a mix of fossil and renewable power sources. Over time renewables will increase and fossil generation decrease.
    1
  5133. Hydrogen cars do not make any sense from a scientific point of view. That is the whole point.
    1
  5134. Take a look at cobalt consumption by the oil industry.
    1
  5135. Lol
    1
  5136. Easily compensated for as soon as you start driving.
    1
  5137. Lol get used to it.
    1
  5138.  @null3319  Bij de verbranding van LNG komt veel CO2 vrij.
    1
  5139. Jij prefereert vieze lucht?
    1
  5140.  @Ghaza020  sterk verhaal 😂
    1
  5141. It's not really relevant that the hydrogen itself is abundant or not. Guess what, electrons are also endlessly available.
    1
  5142. En na al die jaren snap je nog steeds niet waar het om gaat. Het probleem is uiteraard niet dat het fenomeen Sinterklaas opzettelijk racistisch zou zijn. Het gaat om de racistische associatie die de zwarte verschijning (en alles wat er bij hoort) van de knechten veroorzaakt in onze maatschappij. Het is gewoon niet meer van deze tijd.
    1
  5143. Big oil loves hydrogen...
    1
  5144.  @mattbishop731  Hydrogen is the only way for them to keep doing what they love: producing, transporting and selling gaseous products. Shell, BP, Repsol are already involved: https://www.wsj.com/articles/major-energy-companies-bet-big-on-hydrogen-11603392160
    1
  5145. Ook al laad je met grijze stroom, elektrisch rijden is altijd schoner. Open de ogen Flipje!
    1
  5146. And a transmission problem
    1
  5147. Nope
    1
  5148. No because it is not relevant. CO2 emissions of fossil fuels are far higher.
    1
  5149. Waterstof is super inefficiënt, dus verre van duurzaam. Brandstofcellen slijten ook en waterstof zal altijd duurder blijven dan rijden op elektriciteit.
    1
  5150. I am sorry to hear that.
    1
  5151. Super inefficient.
    1
  5152. Well said.
    1
  5153. Weil das abschalten von Wind- und Solarparks hauptsächlich passiert wegen mangel von Transportkapazität.
    1
  5154.  @CarstenWillkomm  Transportkapazität ist nur ein temporäres Problem. Es macht deswegen wenig Sinn große Investitionen in Wasserstoff zu machen. Auch entsteht automatisch mehr Speicherkapazität wenn mehr Elektroautos auf die Straße kommen.
    1
  5155. So Bill, where would the energy come from to power that ‘hydrogen producing cell’?!
    1
  5156.  @fallout0624  No they have not. Efficiency will always remain very bad.
    1
  5157. Batteries do not require replacement. Electric cars are by far the most efficient solution we have.
    1
  5158. Tja het beste is natuurlijk om geen auto te hebben. Als je het dan toch per se wil, dan maar een elektrische.
    1
  5159. But much better than the fossil alternatives.
    1
  5160. Als de regering niks doet maakt de veehouderij het land wel kapot.
    1
  5161. So what do you propose.
    1
  5162. Onzin
    1
  5163.  @GettingNervous  Ein 500 PS SUV mit elektrischer antrieb ist noch immer besser als ein 500 PS SUV mit verbrenner. Und was meinst du genau? Wann es irgendwo kein Parkplätze gibt, dann braucht mann auch keine Ladesäule, oder?
    1
  5164. ​ @GettingNervous  "kein Auto ist besser als ein Elektroauto." Selbsverständlich. Das ist klar. Ladesäule in Wohngebiete sind entworfen für langsam laden in der Nacht. Die Installation davon sollte durch die Kommunalverwaltung und Energieunternehmen organisiert werden. Wann es sich um ein Privatparkplatz händelt kann man einfach eine Steckdose verwenden. Das Problem das sie beschreiben ist in der Praxis eigentlich kein Thema. In meinem Wohnviertel (in die Niederlande) gibt es 8 öffentlichte Ladesäule innerhalb eine Minute Gehweite und mindestens doppelt so viel Elektroautos. Man muss nämlich nicht jeden Tach laden, genauso wie man nicht jeden Tach tanken muss.
    1
  5165. Oke wappie
    1
  5166. what do you mean?
    1
  5167.  @Haseebdoeseverything  Because it is impossible.
    1
  5168. Tegen die tijd zal de MRB voor benzine en diesel ook flink omhoog gaan.
    1
  5169. Wrong. Driving electric is always cleaner. Even if coal is used.
    1
  5170.  @loebkesman  Ik heb het alleen over de veehouderij hoor. Met akkerbouw is weinig mis.
    1
  5171. loebkesman Jij denkt dat ik dat soort dingen eet?!
    1
  5172. loebkesman Haha ga je nou maar effe inlezen. De melk is een beetje naar je hoofd gestegen geloof ik.
    1
  5173. Think positive always Logisch toch? Vuilverbranding veroorzaakt maar een fractie van de stikstofuitstoot vergeleken met de veehouderij.
    1
  5174.  @jooptrumesant365  Als je je zorgen maakt om de levens van plantjes moet je vooral geen vlees eten, grapjas.
    1
  5175.  @menotyou1234 lol
    1
  5176.  @Peye-pv4cb so what do you propose
    1
  5177. Pretty much all road vehicles should be battery electric.
    1
  5178. Meh hybrid was cool 20 years ago but doesn't really make a decent dent in fuel consumption. Fully electric is the only sensible thing to do now.
    1
  5179. Altijd interessant hoe het onderwerp waterstof vaak plotseling bij mensen de behoefte creëert om allerlei complottheorieën op te rakelen..
    1
  5180. Exactly. Dumbest video ever.
    1
  5181. Hybrids were cool 20 years ago. EV is the only sensible solution to lower CO2 emissions.
    1
  5182.  @breaker1685  Hybrids just don't make a big enough of a dent in emissions, period. Battery electric is the only way forward and will soon be more affordable too. Charging happens when you sleep or when you are at work 95% of the time. During road trips you need to take breaks anyway and you will see that charging often takes less time than expected.
    1
  5183. Easy: petroleum fuel production is far more destructive.
    1
  5184. If you crunch the numbers properly you realize that EVs do actually power CO2 emissions a lot. Of course EVs alone won’t save the planet, but they are an important part of a whole variety of solutions.
    1
  5185. He is perfectly right.
    1
  5186.  @GodlikeVallenrod  Why not?
    1
  5187.  @GodlikeVallenrod  You missed the point that both types of vehicles start with electricity. Sure, EV charging is sometimes more efficient (overnight AC charging) than other times (high speed DC charging), but overall an EV has much better efficiency than hydrogen. Comparing storage methods to petrol, diesel, LNG and CNG is useless because they all cause vast amounts of CO2 per kilometer - which is exactly what we are trying to avoid. Yes, hydrogen can theoretically enable low carbon road traffic, but battery electric will always remain much more efficient.
    1
  5188. It is an option but rather inefficient.
    1
  5189. Je roept maar wat
    1
  5190. Jan Willem, een kleine tip: het is identiteit. Niet indentiteit.
    1
  5191.  @SimonGardiner-bj3pq  Efficiency directly correlates with fuel consumption. Fuel consumption is directly proportional to CO2 emissions, you cannot prevent these.
    1
  5192. nope
    1
  5193.  @heldermonteiro2718  Correct and despite that, they are a lot cleaner than a combustion engine car. That’s why they make so much sense.
    1
  5194.  @heldermonteiro2718  I am just sharing facts.
    1
  5195.  @heldermonteiro2718 😂
    1
  5196.  @heldermonteiro2718  Nothing is 100% clean. The point is that it is a lot less polluting than using gasoline or diesel cars.
    1
  5197.  @heldermonteiro2718  sure.. Now go read some research reports on the matter.
    1
  5198. Gelukkig niet inderdaad.
    1
  5199. Thanny Even more inefficient than anything else..
    1
  5200. lol
    1
  5201. The last decade the price decreased substantially.
    1
  5202.  @pabloblanco2656  That’s weird. It accounts for pretty much anywhere around the world.
    1
  5203.  @pabloblanco2656  Sure but the vehicles are still far cheaper than 10 years ago like I said.
    1
  5204. lol why should it
    1
  5205.  @draco2xx  haha
    1
  5206. Spot on
    1
  5207.  @yalz302  Driving electric is ALWAYS cleaner. Even if the electricity used is carbon heavy.
    1
  5208. Common misconception. The transition to EVs (and electric heating) is a gradual process and so is reinforcement of the grid. It will be fine.
    1
  5209. Exactly sir.
    1
  5210. Both industry and road transportation account for about 20% each of total CO2 production.
    1
  5211. Lol
    1
  5212. Because it is far more efficient, cheaper per mile and less complicated.
    1
  5213.  @gompsie  Dat weet iedereen wel captain obvious. Het probleem is ook niet de boeren in het algemeen, maar de enorm schadelijke veehouderij.
    1
  5214. @de goede oude tijd Verzin wat nieuws man
    1
  5215. Nope. Just simple physics.
    1
  5216. Klopt. Maar in dit filmpje hebben ze het niet over gebruik in verbrandingsmotoren.
    1
  5217. No because electrolysis uses that same electricity.
    1
  5218.  @3d1e00  He did it correct. They both start with electricity, so you can leave that out. The hydrogen route has this extra step: generation or electrolysis.
    1
  5219.  @3d1e00  He includes 6% grid loss at 8:40.
    1
  5220. Edward Scrase Again, if you want to include electricity generation for the battery situation, then you have to do this for the fuel cell as wel. It’s simple as that.
    1
  5221. Edward Scrase It makes no sense. He does include electricity generation for neither fcev nor battery. Net difference = 0.
    1
  5222. Edward Scrase Take a look at this: https://images.app.goo.gl/b6poh2w4A5w7keFN6 Now you cover the solar panels with your hand and see what is left.
    1
  5223. @Milan Swoboda haha exactly
    1
  5224. To a certain degree. Just like any mass produced product. EVs are still far better because of efficiency.
    1
  5225.  Pugna  No there are not. Life cycle emissions are lower.
    1
  5226. Dus? Dat is maar een fractie. Minder dan 10% van de ruwe olie wordt gebruikt voor producten als plastic. Als dat het enige is dat we uiteindelijk overhouden mogen we in onze handjes knijpen.
    1
  5227.  @timpo4568  Precies. Dat is slechts een fractie.
    1
  5228.  @timpo4568  Dat klopt. Het zal echter wel drastisch gedaald zijn.
    1
  5229.  @mp40submachinegun81  Obviously demand for animal products should also be decreased further at the same time. Also: less products available means higher prices which is good.
    1
  5230.  @Jadefox32  Not really
    1
  5231.  @Jadefox32  Nobody is forcing anybody.
    1
  5232.  @Jadefox32  Again, no forcing involved. The government should make activities that are better for the planet more attractive.
    1
  5233.  @Jadefox32  as we all know, less meat and dairy is always better. The Netherlands is doing a great job in making animal farming less attractive. Hopefully other countries follow soon.
    1
  5234.  @Jadefox32  It’s really simple: the way factory farming exists right now cannot be maintained. It all starts with a lot less meat and dairy production and consumption and it is great governments around the world are taking measures to encourage this.
    1
  5235.  @Jadefox32  That has literally nothing to do with a switch to a more plant based world.
    1
  5236.  @NJ-wb1cz  Removing local animal farming still works because we have to start somewhere. Eventually other countries will follow too. Meat and dairy production is always bad, no matter where it happens. And the argument that veganism doesn’t work because other people still consume a lot of meat is obviously terribly weak.
    1
  5237.  @KarenCro  everything except meat, dairy and fish. That is A LOT to choose from.
    1
  5238.  @KarenCro  ??
    1
  5239.  @KarenCro  Why would that be hard to imagine???? Infinite number of vegetables, legumes, nuts, seeds, wheat products, sea weeds, et cetera.
    1
  5240.  @autumnthomas3923  Please elaborate
    1
  5241.  @huggybear3098  not at all
    1
  5242.  @caesarsalad1170  thanks
    1
  5243.  @Jadefox32  Large amounts of soap on the market contain no animal products at all. It’s a nonproblem.
    1
  5244. Still better than driving on diesel or gasoline.
    1
  5245. Succes xD
    1
  5246. Of course it is.
    1
  5247. What do you propose instead?
    1
  5248. Vlees en zuivel heeft niemand nodig.
    1
  5249.  @djmdance7540  Neehoor. De maatregelen zijn gericht tegen de veehouderij. Maar 40% van alle akkerbouw bestaat om veevoer te produceren, dus dat zal wel gedeeltelijk verdwijnen.
    1
  5250. Nope. There will never be nearly enough feedstock. Battery electric is the only sensible solution.
    1
  5251. Hopefully a lot
    1
  5252. EVs make far more sense than any diesel or hydrogen car.
    1
  5253.  @pokoco-op  Hydrogen is made from electricity….
    1
  5254. tja, wen er maar aan.
    1
  5255.  @pauladriaanse  First you need to turn electricity into hydrogen, then you need to compress it for storage, then you need to transport it to a refueling location, and then it needs to be converted back to electricity inside the car to power the electric motors. This eventually results in a total efficiency of about 30%.
    1
  5256. Model Y was the best selling vehicle in the world in Q1.
    1
  5257. Not really. The battery is full when you leave so you only meed to charge for about 100 miles theoretically. Regarding even longer trips: you need breaks anyway so why not charge at the same time? Fast charging often only takes half an hour.
    1
  5258. Volumetric energy density of hydrogen is hideously low.
    1
  5259. Still European carmakers refused to switch to electric vehicles a decade ago.
    1
  5260. Pollution of battery production is quickly compensated by the low emissions EV's cause when they drive. Heating a car is about 1 kW of power. Imagine you have only 10 kWh left in your battery, you can still heat it for many ours and then drive to the nearest charger. No difference to an ICE.
    1
  5261. Yea but electric is always the least polluting because it is much more efficient.
    1
  5262. You forget about the loads of energy (and thus CO2) that go to waste when using hydrogen in cars.
    1
  5263. So what, still much better than any other alternative
    1
  5264. Lol time for some physics lessons
    1
  5265. 😂😂😂😂
    1
  5266. Beschermd voor wat? Ze weigeren gewoon met de tijd mee te gaan.
    1
  5267.  @Nickelemeus  Niks nutteloos aan hoor.
    1
  5268.  @Nickelemeus  Een prijsverhoging met een factor 3 op vlees en zuivel lijkt me een uitstekend idee.
    1
  5269.  @Nickelemeus  In tegendeel.
    1
  5270. Hydrogen will always remain inefficient.
    1
  5271. bactanite You need MUCH more electricity to make these amounts of hydrogen.
    1
  5272. Of course it has: "Even if the impossible happened and we all switched to EVs overnight, we think demand would only increase by around 10 per cent." https://www.nationalgrid.com/stories/journey-to-net-zero/5-myths-about-electric-vehicles-busted
    1
  5273. Lol so how do you think hydrogen is made?
    1
  5274.  @trishansadhukhan2680  Exactly. And that requires THREE TIMES as much energy as an electric car requires.
    1
  5275. Not at all. We all need to implement measures to decrease CO2 emissions. There is no way around it.
    1
  5276. De ‘klimaatgekken’ eten meestal nauwelijks dierlijke producten.
    1
  5277. Coal consumption is a good point but you cannot compare dams to fossil emissions.
    1
  5278. Charging does not take hours. Hydrogen will always remain far less efficient.
    1
  5279.  @johnshyer6287  Fast charging is perfectly usable despite the difference in plugs. Have you ever tried it? By the way, here in Europe it's all going to be CCS anyway.
    1
  5280.  @johnshyer6287  Efficiency is highly important because renewable energy will remain scarce for many decades to come.
    1
  5281.  @johnshyer6287  There is many companies focusing on battery recycling, look up American Manganese and Redwood Materials. Before recycling, EV batteries will be reused in stationary energy storage.
    1
  5282.  Pugna  That's the whole point. People do not fast charge on a daily basis.
    1
  5283. There is.
    1
  5284. Tuurlijk zal de vraag naar olie wel verdwijnen. Het zal alleen nog lang duren. Daaraan vooraf gaat een langzame daling.
    1
  5285.  @AnimeHumanCoherence  exactly
    1
  5286. Droom lekker verder
    1
  5287.  @robertmcevoy24  Younger generations couldn’t care less. If this helps selling electric vehicles I am all for it.
    1
  5288. 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
  5289. Well designed batteries last hundreds of thousands of kilometers. Battery replacement could eventually cost several thousands of dollars per module.
    1
  5290. You need energy for that.
    1
  5291. 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
  5292. Yeah sure and hydrogen fuel cells will come falling from the skies 😄
    1
  5293.  @EngineeringwithRosie  That would be highly interesting.
    1
  5294. There is plenty of lithium.
    1
  5295. Kijk eens naar een elektrische Opel Corsa, Fiat 500 of Dacia spring. Klein en niet al te zwaar.
    1
  5296. Alles wordt elektrisch dus het lijkt me logisch dat ze nu al naar de volgende generatie aan het kijken zijn.
    1
  5297. 😂😂
    1
  5298.  @stevenstidham13  Exactly all the examples you mentioned are perfectly in line with laws of physics (and always have been), they were just a matter of technological or scientific progression. The good old myth about the car than runs on water is definitely not.
    1
  5299. 😂
    1
  5300. Even de brandstofprijzen verhogen en je kan nergens meer heen.
    1
  5301. If you think cold winters ‘zap the battery’ it is clear you never wanted to inform yourself. And no, hydrogen will never be a viable solution for cars. Come on, it’s 2024. Not 2005.
    1
  5302.  @JohnDoe-xr8dz  yes, and that will always remain so.
    1
  5303. Why not? Germany is already at 40% renewable.
    1
  5304.  @horserous  Almost. To be more precise: wind: 20%, solar: 9%, hydro: 3%, biomass: 7,5%.
    1
  5305. EVs are always less polluting, even on fossil electricity.
    1
  5306. Livestock farmers don’t deserve support at all.
    1
  5307. Het is juist zeer verstandig dat er weinig in geinvesteerd wordt. Rijden op waterstof is zeer inefficient en zou daarom verboden moeten worden.
    1
  5308. Well done.
    1
  5309. Vlees en zuivel hebben we niet nodig.
    1
  5310. If you still think hydrogen cars make more sense in 2024 it only proves you have no clue what you are talking about.
    1
  5311. You can’t see CO2.
    1
  5312.  @M.T....  The 10 year thing. It’s a famous myth. The batteries will outlive the rest of the vehicle.
    1
  5313.  @M.T....  There is no need to think if you can just look it up. Average EV batteries easily last 1500 cycles. LFP chemistry does 3000.
    1
  5314.  @M.T....  What are you talking about? Several manufacturers produce LFP battery cars you can buy today. And the vast majority of cars never gets to 450,000 miles anyway. The average car drives 15,000 per year. 1500 cycles is plenty.
    1
  5315. If hydrogen was a great idea, Tesla’s would use it from day one.
    1
  5316. And your point is?
    1
  5317. Plastics is only a few per cent of oil use. Not really relevant and as long as it isn’t burned it is not really a concern regarding climate.
    1
  5318. All cars need to be replaced eventually. It's just a natural process.
    1
  5319.  @WhoStoleMyAlias  De energiemix is wel degelijk van toepassing, vooral de verhouding van kolen/gas heeft een enorme invloed. Dan kom je in Nederland inderdaad rond de 400 gram / kWh uit. Best een prima score. De heer Hoekstra rekent echter ook met toekomstige elektriciteitsemissies aangezien de auto lang mee zal gaan. Tevens gebruikt hij 65 kg CO2 / kWh voor accuproductie, gebaseerd op uitgebreid onderzoek. Maar goed, het lijkt mij ook veilig om dit conservatief op 100 kg houden. Dan de berekening. Je zit aardig in de buurt, maar: 1 liter E10 = 2,7 kg CO2 per liter (productie en verbranding). Een benzineauto die inderdaad 1:18 rijdt stoot hierdoor 150 gram CO2 / km uit. Het verschil is dus 90 gram per kilometer. Dan kom je op een dikke 80k uit. Het is veel, maar nog steeds prima aangezien de auto en de accu veel langer dan dat mee zullen gaan. Overigens: als we uitgaan van een Model 3 SR+, waar je ook uitstekend mee op vakantie kan, dan is de productieuitstoot slechts 5000 kg. Het kantelpunt zit dan net boven een halve ton km's.
    1
  5320.  @WhoStoleMyAlias  Precies
    1
  5321.  @knalltutemichl3473  exactly
    1
  5322.  @KitKitChanIsaac  Of course I can imagine that. Enthusiasm is a pretty bad argument to keep relying on old technology.
    1
  5323.  @KitKitChanIsaac  I couldn't care less about 'NASCAR'.
    1
  5324.  @KitKitChanIsaac  😂
    1
  5325.  @KitKitChanIsaac  Your last sentence clarifies why you think not all cars should be EVs. It is simply incorrect. It has been a well known fact for years and you can easily look up the research reports.
    1
  5326.  @KitKitChanIsaac  It’s not. Come back when you actually informed yourself in stead of reading an article from The Sun.
    1
  5327. Lol hydrogen is so horribly inefficient CO2 emissions are far higher than any EV. EV charging in cities simply happens at public chargers, no problem at all.
    1
  5328. Leuk idee, maar erg kostbaar en veel minder efficiënt dan laden met een kabeltje.
    1
  5329. Well the material does not get burned right?
    1
  5330. Wrong. The alternative would be selling AND burning the oil themselves.
    1
  5331. That’s a common misconception. Hydrogen will always be terribly inefficient and cumbersome compared to (future) battery tech.
    1
  5332. Never heard of DC fast charging?
    1
  5333. Lithium is not rare at all. Hydrogen takes loads of energy to get.
    1
  5334.  @NathamelCamel  It has literally not: https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/11/13/coup-morales-bolivia-lithium-isnt-new-oil/ “There’s a lot of misunderstanding, there’s this idea that lithium is rare and critical. It is critical. It is not rare by any stretch of the imagination,”
    1
  5335. Inderdaad
    1
  5336. Subsea DC connections are far better suited for transporting renewable energy. Shipping hydrogen is very inefficient.
    1
  5337.  @yazanmowed  Sure, but you can make hydrogen anywhere. The more shipping avoided, the better.
    1
  5338. Niet in de dierentuin dus.
    1
  5339. Zeg het maar, wat is het alternatief?
    1
  5340. Alexander van der Hilst-Frijn Klopt, maar vergrijzing is maar een tijdelijk probleem.
    1
  5341. No there hasn't. Laws of physics still apply.
    1
  5342. Probably not because hydrogen will always remain a factor 2 to 3 less efficient.
    1
  5343. They don’t pollute more at all. Not even close.
    1
  5344. omdat het in praktisch alle opzichten super slecht is
    1
  5345.  @Zappy4001  If you don't like the power of big oil and auto, you shouldn't be looking at hydrogen. Battery electric will always remain the cheapest, most efficient and most versatile way of transportation that enables you to fill up your car at home with an electricity source of your choice.
    1
  5346. Zappy 4001 What about platinum for fuel cells?
    1
  5347. Zappy 4001 WTF are you talking about
    1
  5348. Zappy 4001 No problem. Because EVs are much more efficient than any alternative.
    1
  5349. De veehouderij dient zo snel mogelijk opgedoekt te worden.
    1
  5350. Wrong. Pretty much all electricity is cleaner than any diesel or petrol.
    1
  5351. Batteries, fuel tanks and fuel cells in hydrogen cars wear out as well and need to be disposed of as well. EV batteries do not end up in land fills.
    1
  5352.  @mojrimibnharb4584  The battery is smaller, but lasts much shorter.
    1
  5353.  @mojrimibnharb4584  There are currently barely any EV batteries being recycled because there are barely any available. Mass market EVs have been on the market since 2012 and the batteries easily last 10 years. There are many companies preparing for large scale battery recycling (Red Wood Materials, American Manganese). Again, hydrogen cars require (small) lithium ion batteries as well. And you clearly never looked into the maintenance schedule of a Toyota Mirai. Maintenance is very frequent compared to an EV.
    1
  5354.  @mojrimibnharb4584  The emissions per kilometer of a HFC vehicle are always 3 times as high so we simply cannot afford that in a time in which CO2 emission reduction is top priority. And again, battery production and recycling are not environmental disasters and HFC vehicles require lithium, cobalt, nickel and platinum - although in different amounts.
    1
  5355.  @mojrimibnharb4584  Production emissions of hydrogen.......
    1
  5356.  @mojrimibnharb4584  The production method is not relevant. Hydrogen fuel cell cars will always require 3 times as much electricity. There is by far not enough renewable energy, so there are emissions involved.
    1
  5357.  @mojrimibnharb4584  Renewable energy is scarce. Very scarce. And this will remain so during the next few decades. We need renewable energy for pretty much anything, not just cars. Wasting massive amounts on H2 vehicles is just plain dumb.
    1
  5358.  @mojrimibnharb4584  Why would I not know what H2 is while I have only been complaining about its efficiency?! Of course I know how it works, the production losses of it is the whole point of this discussion. I didn’t say renewables are not build fast enough. They are, but nevertheless it will take decades before we reach 100%. The problem is, if we choose for hydrogen cars this whole process is delayed because we literally need THREE TIMES the amount of solar and wind power.
    1
  5359.  @mojrimibnharb4584  1. The ratio is 3:1 look at this: https://cleantechnica.com/2021/02/01/chart-why-battery-electric-vehicles-beat-hydrogen-electric-vehicles-without-breaking-a-sweat/amp/ 2. I was talking about renewables required for transport. 3. Correct. That is why hydrogen is a bad choice, it slows the transition down. 4. Again, the way of low carbon electricity generation is irrelevant. You still need 3 times the amount of it for hydrogen. So in that case 3 X as many nuclear power stations. By the way, power stations take decades to plan, develop and construct. I am not against nuclear in general. Just stating that it does not solve the efficiency problem of hydrogen.
    1
  5360.  @mojrimibnharb4584  Sure, but hydrogen cars do not solve the material problem either. They require, among others, lithium, nickel and cobalt for the battery and platinum for the fuel cell.
    1
  5361.  @mojrimibnharb4584  Correct, the amounts are smaller but both components (battery and fuel cell) last shorter than an EV battery. The small battery in hydrogen cars cycles much more and therefore wears out faster. I don’t think fuel cell cars can do without buffering battery.
    1
  5362.  @wermagst  Good point. It would make a considerable difference on the motorway.
    1
  5363.  @linusa2996 kWh not kW
    1
  5364. Hopefully soon.
    1
  5365. Fortunately EV trucks don’t need that because trucks can charge during their break time.
    1
  5366.  @trowawayacc  Recent history has shown that EV batteries last a lot longer than expected.
    1
  5367. That is the first generation. This one is the 2024 model and there are a huge improvement.
    1
  5368. Not really. Modern EV battery systems are equipped with proper temperature management systems reducing the effect to very manageable levels.
    1
  5369.  @Maarten_vd  daar gaat het toch ook niet alleen om
    1
  5370.  @Maarten_vd  Het probleem is inderdaad het imago dat nu aan Tesla’s kleeft. Veel mensen willen er simpelweg niet meer mee geassocieerd worden en dat is zeer begrijpelijk.
    1
  5371.  @Maarten_vd  Ik denk niet dat het iets met bang zijn te maken heeft. Het is toch heel normaal om ergens niet mee geassocieerd te willen worden als je je niet kunt vinden in het gedachtengoed en gedrag van - in dit geval - de CEO? Het gaat om je eigen mening, niet om die van anderen.
    1
  5372. LOL yeah lets wait before all energy is 100% renewable before we start developing EV technology... xD
    1
  5373. Yeah but not for vehicles.
    1
  5374.  @utha2665  It’s just a matter of physics. Hydrogen will always remain far less efficient. Hydrogen vehicles are not much lighter than EVs and when you want to extend their range you have to make the tanks even bigger or increase the pressure even more, resulting in even lower efficiency. Also, hydrogen cars consume a lot more electricity and are therefore not a solution for grid congestion. Hydrogen makes zero sense in passenger cars. Possibly in long range trucking, shipping and aviation.
    1
  5375. Benzine en diesel zullen sowieso meer kosten per kilometer dan elektrisch.
    1
  5376.  @dianavangelderen8584  Als er iemand tekenen van indoctrinatie vertoont ben jij het wel.
    1
  5377. Electric cars are always cleaner, no matter where the energy comes from. Lithium has nothing to do with child labor.
    1
  5378. Sơn Phạm Almost. BEV = 70%
    1
  5379.  @shizzle9011  Ooit gehoord van Saudi Arabië? De meeste olie wordt sinds jaar en dag in woestijn-achtig gebied gewonnen. Het is juist een van de makkelijkere plekken. En H Vrolijk heeft gelijk, als we er niet meer makkelijk bij kunnen houdt het gewoon op omdat een litertje diesel of benzine dan letterlijk onbetaalbaar wordt aan de pomp. Dan gaat iedereen van zelf elektrisch rijden.
    1
  5380.  @darkcloud5830  5-10x?! more like 1.5x
    1
  5381.  @darkcloud5830  Still wouldn't create a price difference of 5-10x. Charging station would cost exactly the same, insurance is probably cheaper for the Chinese vehicles and maintenance maybe a bit cheaper.
    1
  5382. No we don’t
    1
  5383. Will follow later.
    1
  5384. Not 4 hours..
    1
  5385. As mentioned in the video, these batteries don't make sense in EVs. Lithium ion will remain the most important chemistry for a very long time.
    1
  5386.  @PeterSedesse  They are not. The $11k BYD Seagull you are referring to has LFP blade batteries. BYD and CATL are planning to start producing the version with sodium ion later this year.
    1
  5387. 😂
    1
  5388. Resources for batteries are not really a problem. Is it challenging? Yes. But it is just a matter of ramping up extraction. Hydrogen cars also require materials like platinum, lithium, cobalt and nickel. Due to their lack of efficiency hydrogen cars will also require three times as much energy, so three times as many solar panels and wind turbines need to be built and maintained.
    1
  5389. Wat een onzin
    1
  5390. ​ @kingbeam80ify  That is an incorrect assumption. Just because hydrogen could be made from surplus renewables does not mean it actually happens and the other way around you could argue that EVs can be charged with renewables as well (requiring only 1/3 of the energy). Smart charging systems that regulate the charging power according to the availability of renewable energy already exist. Also: when there will be enough EVs in the future there will be barely any surplus renewable energy left because these is always an average number of EVs charging at any given moment of the day.
    1
  5391. Euro 6 mag er in 2027 nog gewoon in hoor.
    1
  5392. Exactly. Weirdly enough, almost nobody understands this 🤦🏻‍♂️
    1
  5393. Nope
    1
  5394.  @ShankarShashi  It's not similar at all. Most lithium is mined by brine evaporation. Any mass produced product is in a way bad for the environment. The goal is to choose the least polluting option.
    1
  5395.  @Alien-mu7ex  hahaha
    1
  5396. I understand where the comparison is coming from, but gasoline and diesel are quite close to each other efficiency wise. Hydrogen and batteries are miles apart. Hydrogen for passenger cars will never make it, for most of the trucks probably neither.
    1
  5397. Daarom moet er ook subsidie beschikbaar komen om veetelers te helpen eerder met pensioen te laten gaan of te begeleiden naar akkerbouw.
    1
  5398. Wrong. Driving electric is always cleaner than gasoline or diesel. The grid gets greener every year and even now it is already better to drive an EV. Also, the grid is nog Tesla's responsibility.
    1
  5399. Inderdaad. Zelfs een simpele keramiekoven komt al boven de 1000 graden.
    1
  5400. Lol not at all. Hydrogen may be very common but it requires shit loads of energy to capture. There is plenty of lithium en batteries will eventually be recycled of course.
    1
  5401.  @thebrowns5337  Of course you can, but it requires far less energy to simply charge your electric car at home. A hydrogen car may look better regarding the environment, but is not. They are so incredibly inefficient that emissions from electricity are far higher than the production emissions of an EV. By the way: hydrogen cars require lithium, cobalt, nickel and platinum to manufacture.
    1
  5402. The grid can scale together with the growth of EVs.
    1
  5403.  @NomenClature-o8s  haha
    1
  5404. Haha! Speak for yourself. Electric cars are many times more fuel efficient than the most fuel efficient ICE car.
    1
  5405. The problem with ‘free choice’ is that it will slow down the energy transition. CO2 emissions need to go down fast, we won’t get a second chance.
    1
  5406. Yes you are
    1
  5407. Wrongggggggg
    1
  5408. What are you talking about. Combustion engines in passenger cars are soon over, no matter how much R&D you throw at it.
    1
  5409.  @Boozna  No matter how you spin it, EVs are a huge improvement regarding life cycle emissions.
    1
  5410.  @HappyCamperRealOne  Ja, heel de wereld.
    1
  5411. It’s the only option.
    1
  5412.  @thorpower1015  wrong
    1
  5413. Lol 😂
    1
  5414. MeDingez inderdaad. uitstekend moment om er mee te kappen.
    1
  5415. NOx emissions*
    1
  5416. Inefficient
    1
  5417. dan wat
    1
  5418. Klopt, er ontbreekt wat informatie. Echter is gebruik van een brandstofcel ook nog veel te inefficient.
    1
  5419. Still better than any combustion engine car and the grid gets greener every year.
    1
  5420. Veehouderijen vervangen door natuur is nog veel mooier.
    1
  5421. @salinachaaten Een groot wappiefestijn.
    1
  5422. Current Model S has equal range as a Mirai. Hydrogen is over.
    1
  5423. BEVs are always the winner regarding efficiency in the long run. BEVs last a long time so it is worth building them.
    1
  5424. c info I did that countless times. Conclusion remains: BEV is the only proper way forward.
    1
  5425. c info I did not publish anything. There is plenty of proper research to be found. For a start: https://www.ivl.se/download/18.14d7b12e16e3c5c36271070/1574923989017/C444.pdf
    1
  5426.  @cinfo2800  That's correct. The paper is about battery production emissions which make up the biggest part of the car's production emissions. The rest of the car is relatively equal to ICE production. Current batteries will last longer than the car itself, will then be used in other applications and then be recycled. There is not much data on battery recycling emissions because there is currently no large scale recycling in operation as there is no large supply of worn out batteries yet. Here is a paper by Auke Hoekstra (University of Eindhoven) about EV / ICE comparison: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2542435119302715
    1
  5427. They are not in decline and there is no such thing as ‘electric engines’.
    1
  5428. Of course.
    1
  5429. Obviously the statistical results are relative numbers…
    1
  5430. Hydrogen is super inefficient. It is still an electric car by the way.
    1
  5431.  @troyheffernan1261  Even more inefficient.
    1
  5432. It’s not because it is super inefficient. And no, this will never get considerably better.
    1
  5433.  @D_M_W_  Compared to battery electric vehicles. The technology for hydrogen fuel cell cars has been around for a long time. Efficiency has not improved and will never improve considerably because of laws of physics. There is no way around that.
    1
  5434.  @D_M_W_  The Mercedes truck proves nothing about improved efficiency.
    1
  5435. The comments would have been a lot different only a few years ago.
    1
  5436.  @trythis2821  Plenty of other safe options these days.
    1
  5437.  @Yurek_Vigo  Nope. Elon is singlehandedly responsible for all this shit.
    1
  5438. Included.
    1
  5439. Very nice
    1
  5440. You shouldn’t
    1
  5441. Bio fuels or synthetic fuels are very inefficient. Electric cars only require a fraction of the energy.
    1
  5442.  @Brian-om2hh  Exactly.
    1
  5443. You should realise oil refineries consume a lot of electrical power too. Driving electric is always cleaner by the way, even when mainly fossil electricity is used to charge them. Obviously renewable energy will take over more and more too.
    1
  5444.  @anonsenitl  Kohlenstrom gibt es Kaum, wie oft muß das noch wiederholt werden?
    1
  5445. Of course it is
    1
  5446. Up to the user.
    1
  5447.  @Dylan-mr5hs  Het gaat om elektriciteit, niet primaire energie. En dan hebben we het over 50% hernieuwbaar. Maar het is niet eens relevant, elektrisch rijden is altijd minder vervuilend.
    1
  5448.  @fredbloggs5902  If that were the only thing there would be no problem.
    1
  5449. Unlikely anytime soon. It’s a great addition for stationary applications.
    1
  5450. LOL
    1
  5451. 👍🏻
    1
  5452. Wronnggggggg
    1
  5453. Lol that is a famous myth
    1
  5454. Electric of course.
    1
  5455. Problems like what?
    1
  5456. Petrol is not the way obiously
    1
  5457. LOL people still believe this 'onboard electrolysis' stuff?! it is impossible...
    1
  5458. Il-fang-lI gaming It’s just simple physics. It’s very worrisome that in 2020 people still believe you can create energy out of nothing. There is plenty of great information to be found on how the laws thermodynamics work. On-demand HHO creation is useless and has nothing to do with real hydrogen cars.
    1
  5459. Max Herrin Haha have fun with your useless HHO electrolysis contraptions lol
    1
  5460. Max Herrin I am here to prevent people to believe in nonsense ‘inventions’ that only slow down the energy transition because they don’t work. You are doing nothing to change the world in a good way. On board electrolysis is, again, completely useless because it is impossible to create energy out of thin air. It costs more energy (gasoline) to create the hydrogen than you are able to get out of it again. I advise you to get your head around some basic physics. Look up the first and second law of thermodynamics. You won’t regret it.
    1
  5461.  @il-fang-ligaming2141  Lol, no you can't.
    1
  5462. Still the best option though.
    1
  5463. Flopped because there are MANY times more EVs on the road.
    1
  5464.  @OM-bs7of  EVs are taking over ICE cars. Hydrogen cars are doing nothing. Thankfully.
    1
  5465.  @OM-bs7of  Look at the car sales figures of European countries. 5% of all new cars sold are fully electric in my country.
    1
  5466.  @OM-bs7of  I don’t think 5 min is a target. Current state of battery tech is already very good. Near time improvements (Tesla 4680) make it a complete no-brainer. Fuel cell vehicles will never be able to get anywhere near the efficiency of an BEV. Most EU countries will ban sales of new ICE vehicles within 9 years. Year over year figures for EVs doubled in many countries in the past few years. There is simply no way back and hydrogen will not play a significant role in it and that is a good thing.
    1
  5467.  @OM-bs7of  Hydrogen cars are not significantly lighter than EVs because they carry hydrogen tanks and batteries. Of course planes are a different story. Hydrogen may play a role in there. I was talking about road vehicles. Here will battery electric become dominant. And no, it’s not just a matter of creating the infrastructure for hydrogen. Again, hydrogen vehicles are far too inefficient. We cannot justify such enormous energy consumption while we actually have to get emissions down. That is hydrogen’s biggest issue. Not the infrastructure.
    1
  5468.  @OM-bs7of  The Model S Long Range Plus is also capable of 402 miles. Weight does not affect energy consumption considerably and definitely not when compared to the inefficiency of a fuel cell vehicle. The Model S consumes 306 Wh per mile while a Mirai consumes 450 Wh per mile, and that does of course not include the energy required before the fuel gets into the car.
    1
  5469. Correct, but despite that they are far more efficient.
    1
  5470.  @M13x13M  Not difficult at all. The increase of energy consumption caused by a few hundred kilograms of extra mass is nothing compared to the terribly low efficiency of the combustion engine.
    1
  5471.  @M13x13M  Not at all. Just look up average consumption of EVs online.
    1
  5472.  @M13x13M  Just look up EV consumption numbers
    1
  5473. No, it’s because of physics. EVs make far more sense.
    1
  5474. You are very misinformed.
    1
  5475. lol they are not
    1
  5476. They are just spending the money in the best way possible.
    1
  5477.  @havenzhai5187  The alternative would be selling oil AND driving combustion engine cars.
    1
  5478. As long as you live in an area in the world where charging networks have been well developed, EVs are obviously far better.
    1
  5479.  @maxpayne7419  Yes. You just don’t like them, but that is a different argument.
    1
  5480. Je weet duidelijk niet waar het om gaat.
    1
  5481. Sure, but even with the best train networks you would still need a lot of trucks and they need to be zero emission.
    1
  5482. Not necessary at all. Charging infrastructure is far easier to expand.
    1
  5483.  @mickk7489  It actually is. Swapping is highly complex. Take a look at the NIO stations.
    1
  5484.  @mickk7489  Of course, it works great. But scaling is complex and expensive. It will play a role, but can never replace charging (and is not necessary).
    1
  5485. You should compare a new EV to a new ICE car…
    1
  5486. Alleen wel super inefficiënt.
    1
  5487. Probably not. The Prius is a great car that saves on fuel and is relatively efficient. The Mirai uses very costly fuel and is very inefficient.
    1
  5488.  @hi9580  You need much more solar panels for this than for charging electric cars. 3-4 times as many.
    1
  5489. Sarnarath De Nederlandse veehouderij produceert vooral voor het buitenland. Bovendien moeten we sowieso stoppen met het eten van dode dieren en zuivel - juist omdat we met zoveel zijn.
    1
  5490. Sarnarath Nee dat is het niet - en al helemaal niet geschikt om de wereldbevolking mee te voeden. Het is simpelweg te inefficient. Avocado’s hebben hier niks mee te maken. Mooi stukje whataboutism.
    1
  5491. Sarnarath Jezelf als volwassen persoon volproppen met gestolde moedermelk van een compleet ander zoogdier klinkt inderdaad heel gezond 👍🏻🤢
    1
  5492. Hygiene is inderdaad echt vaak een probleem in (internationale) treinen. Dat heb ik in vliegtuigen nooit meegemaakt. Wellicht ook een gevolg van personeelstekorten?
    1
  5493. PHEV and EV are far better than HEV.
    1
  5494.  @sesvid  It’s just physics
    1
  5495.  @sesvid  You are right about the unnecessary complexity of PHEVs. I don't like them either. It's just that they are better than HEVs because you can actually charge them, making them a lot more efficient. Obviously pure EVs are the best. Charging is not that much of a problem. There is no shortage of electricity, only a shortage of grid capacity at peak moments of the day. An EV only requires about 10 kWh per day on average, which is no problem for the grid to supply - especially when spread out over the day. Many European countries have been using public curbside AC charging for over a decade in densely populated areas. Works great. You can find plenty of reports on battery recycling. It's not an issue and definitely not a reason to continue with combustion engines.
    1
  5496.  @sesvid  Again, 10 kWh (not kW) per day is nothing. There is no lack of electricity. HEV + synthetic fuels is a terrible solution because this would literally require 5 times as much electric energy. There is literally zero chance this is going to play any significant role for passenger cars.
    1
  5497. You forgot about efficiency
    1
  5498.  @cosmicbuddhi8029  That is a common misconception. The efficiency of hydrogen fuel cell cars is limited by simple laws of physics. It will never become considerably more efficient.
    1
  5499.  @cosmicbuddhi8029  That all doesn’t proof anything about the efficiency. This simple chart says it all: https://cleantechnica.com/2021/02/01/chart-why-battery-electric-vehicles-beat-hydrogen-electric-vehicles-without-breaking-a-sweat/
    1
  5500.  @cosmicbuddhi8029  Hydrogen will always be inefficient due to laws of physics. That is the whole point. The stories about Lazar and Meyer and their so called confidential patents are a myth, just like Meyer’s ‘suspicious’ death.
    1
  5501.  @cosmicbuddhi8029  It cannot work because of physics. Just because the DoD prevented some sort of contraption to become public a long time ago does not mean it actually worked.
    1
  5502.  @cosmicbuddhi8029  Flat earth theorists are usually not the ones that actually have some basic sense of physics...
    1
  5503.  @cosmicbuddhi8029  Of course it works... But the contraptions of Lazar and Meyer do not improve efficiency to any sort of magical level like you stated. Hydrogen cars are dreadfully inefficient and this remains so because of physics.
    1
  5504. They are much greener than any ICE driven vehicle.
    1
  5505. ok kleuter
    1
  5506. Still horribly inefficient
    1
  5507. Bjørn 😊
    1
  5508. Yea let's stick to internal combustion engines for another century xD
    1
  5509. You are just parotting other uninformed people. Inform yourself.
    1
  5510.  @AORD72 exactly
    1
  5511.  @saulgoodman2018  Like I said: the load is low, so total load is also low. 10 kWh spread over 10 hours is only 1000 watts.
    1
  5512.  @saulgoodman2018  Why is it so hard to understand that if the load per home is low, the total load is also low?
    1
  5513.  @saulgoodman2018  Because the load is lower than daytime peak.
    1
  5514. Yeah let’s ignore science instead 😂
    1
  5515. Yup
    1
  5516.  @robri87-hh4gr  Interesting. I know about the (few) oil companies that exploit charger locations, but which ones are involved with EV production and software?
    1
  5517.  @shoryukenpower  Exactly, EVs everywhere!
    1
  5518. We produceren vooral eten voor het buitenland.
    1
  5519. EVs are always the least polluting option.
    1
  5520. Fast charging is not a daily activity indeed. EVs charge at home or in the street most of the time.
    1
  5521. Haha 😄
    1
  5522. It’s the other way around. Big oil loves hydrogen.
    1
  5523. Incorrect. Automakers refused to start the transition 10+ years ago. That is the problem.
    1
  5524. Only in Murica
    1
  5525.  @back2nature608  ja dan is het opeens helemaal niet erg natuurlijk 😂
    1
  5526.  @joopiedelange8463  weleens van groente, peulvruchten, noten en granen gehoord?
    1
  5527.  @back2nature608  haha
    1
  5528. ok wappie
    1
  5529. No they are not.
    1
  5530.  @janlester  Why do you think so?
    1
  5531. Correct
    1
  5532. Lol and the energy for electrolysis comes from...?
    1
  5533.  @ishaybar-yosef415  everything will be electric
    1
  5534. Ja want als iets niet leuk is, dan is het gewoon ‘onzin’!!11
    1
  5535. You really think charging is such a big deal?
    1
  5536. CO2-emissions would be many times higher. So no, it would not be better.
    1
  5537. @ incorrect
    1
  5538. @ErnstHaft-k7x both things but mainly the second
    1
  5539.  @derbigpr500  Incorrect. You are just fooling yourself. Please go read some actual research reports before spreading more BS. It’s 2025. Lots of solid data has been around for many years.
    1
  5540. Giorgi Sanikidze And where does the dynamo (alternator) get it’s energy from?
    1
  5541.  @Giogio-wc2pn  Exactly. So the alternator is turned by the combustion engine so the energy comes from petrol. Why would you do this?
    1
  5542.  @Giogio-wc2pn  That changes nothing. Still powered by the engine.
    1
  5543.  @Giogio-wc2pn  Why don't you carefully read Milan's excellent explanation. It is just simple physics. The YouTube video you are referring to doesn't proof anything, it's simply a petrol engine running partly on hydrogen but it will not improve the fuel consumption at all. It uses extra energy instead.
    1
  5544. Giorgi Sanikidze It would not work. It’s called physics. Look it up, buy a book, enjoy 😀
    1
  5545. Den R Dat verandert niets aan het feit dat elektrische auto’s onder aan de streep schoner zijn. Ik beweer niet dat er helemaal geen nadelen kleven aan de productie.
    1
  5546. Wrong comparison.
    1
  5547. It's 2024. EVs have been attractive for a while...
    1
  5548.  @Rick776  heb je pech
    1
  5549.  @Rick776  Omdat je over niet al te lange tijd niets meer te kiezen hebt.
    1
  5550.  @Rick776  jup en daarna is het voorbij
    1
  5551.  @Rick776  Uiteindelijk niet meer. Het is immers de openbare weg, dus het is niet aan jou.
    1
  5552.  @Rick776  Nee, het is juist een positieve blik op de toekomst 😎
    1
  5553. Well to wheel emissions. Included in the video.
    1
  5554. Air.
    1
  5555. The energy is extracted from the environment air.
    1
  5556. Vlees en zuivel hebben we niet nodig.
    1
  5557. HHO is a myth 😂
    1
  5558. bart h You can’t create energy out of nothing.
    1
  5559. bart h Anything you stick out of the fuselage causes extra drag and thus requires more energy.
    1
  5560. Look up LDV eT60
    1
  5561.  @1mlb704  Well simply put: everything you said is not true.
    1
  5562.  @1mlb704  Cobalt mining is a lot better than petroleum mining, refinement and combustion. Cobalt will soon not be required for EV batteries anymore. Li-ion batteries last hundreds of thousands of kilometers. So yes, more than 10 years in many cases. Early EV batteries had their problems, like those from GM. Phone batteries are completely different from EV batteries. Fast charging often takes about 20 minutes on average. Not a problem for anyone. Also: you start every day with a full battery as the car charges when you sleep. Battery recycling will be taken care of. The point is that the majority of current ICEs get replaced by EVs as soon as possible. Hydrogen fuel cell is simply too damn inefficient. Bottom line: battery electric vehicles are far less harmful for the environment and climate than fossil powered counterparts or hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles.
    1
  5563.  @1mlb704  Of course we have to be critical to any solution :) We are definitely not there yet, but battery electric is simply the most efficient way of using our (scarce) energy.
    1
  5564. Of course they will. The vast majority of vehicles on the road will become battery electric.
    1
  5565. No dude. That is not the reason.
    1
  5566. Sneue sport. In de 21e eeuw massaal benzine verbranden onder het mom van 'sport' en 'technische vooruitgang'.
    1
  5567. Of course
    1
  5568.  @miltononyango  Longer than the rest of the vehicle.
    1
  5569.  @matthewmarkus2495  Also you will own an EV.
    1
  5570. Too inefficient.
    1
  5571. Exactly!
    1
  5572. Not at all. Just because some legacy automaker can't make a living selling EVs doesn't mean others can and are doing great.
    1
  5573. Er zijn genoeg goede argumenten voor 100 km/u.
    1
  5574.  @Kevin_no  welke nog meer behalve enige tijdsbesparing?
    1
  5575. Het is een bekende mythe dat Nikola Tesla ooit iets met ‘vrije energie’ gedaan zou hebben.
    1
  5576. Why should they?
    1
  5577. Also if it is many times less efficient?
    1
  5578. Wel uitstekend besteed belastinggeld.
    1
  5579. They probably wouldn't do much better with PV.
    1
  5580. There is nothing forced and they are not dead on arrival. Try one for yourself.
    1
  5581. dian plat ik heb het over veeteelt.
    1
  5582. Thor Jacobs De overheid ziet gelukkig ook in dat we minder vlees en zuivel moeten eten. Daarom moet de veestapel drastisch verkleind worden.
    1
  5583. Boeren bliefen Boeren Ik doe het al 5 jaar.
    1
  5584. m-nno hollyday Dat is onzin. Je kan prima kunstmest en compost gebruiken. Veehouderij is onnodig.
    1
  5585. Adrellias leer lezen
    1
  5586. Mark Jacobs Ik heb het over de veehouderij, met akkerbouw is niks mis.
    1
  5587. Qwerty Daarom is er ook overheidbeleid nodig. Veeteelt drastisch verkleinen, belasting op vlees en zuivel omhoog en subsidie naar veehouders die afschalen of stoppen.
    1
  5588. Bart van de Ven Tuurlijk niet 😂 wie eet er nou dooie dieren. Denk daar maar eens over na!
    1
  5589. Kip Kip maar compost en menselijke mest wel
    1
  5590. Kip Kip Als we veehouderij puur zouden behouden voor mestproductie zou dan het domste idee ooit zijn.
    1
  5591. Kip Kip onzin. Plantaardig afval wordt compost en de hoeveelheid land gebruikt voor akkerbouw wordt juist minder dan nu aangezien er enorm veel land wordt gebruikt voor het verbouwen van veevoer.
    1
  5592. Kip Kip Ik zeg ook niet dat het genoeg is. Jij maakt er een probleem van. Nogmaals: veeteelt is nergens goed voor.
    1
  5593. Kip Kip Dat iets zo is ontstaan betekent niet dat het zo moet blijven. Het gebrek aan mest is op te lossen zoals eerder uitgelegd.
    1
  5594. Kip Kip Nogmaals: kunstmest en compost. En werkgelegeheid noemen om een vernietigende en intrinsiek slechte industrie in stand houden is echt een bedroevend slecht argument.
    1
  5595. Kip Kip Alles wat je noemt is niet relevant omdat de nadelen van de veehouderij vele malen groter zijn dan de ‘voordelen’. Het misbruiken en vermoorden van dieren voor ons plezier is niet van deze tijd en compleet nutteloos en inefficient. Akkerbouw verdient alle aandacht en veel onderzoek ter verbetering. Veeteelt verdient dat absoluut niet.
    1
  5596. Kip Kip Nederland gaat echt niet failliet door het beëindigen van die gekkigheid. Hou op met het verzinnen van ongeldige argumenten. Als je vlees wil eten moet je dat doen omdat je het lekker vindt en daarbij accepteert dat je bijdraagt aan een vernietigende en dieronterende industrie. Er zijn verder exact 0 argumenten om de veehouderij in stand te houden. Het misbruiken en vermoorden van dieren is onetisch, alleen beseft dat nog niet iedereen. Toen de slavernij op z’n eind liep waren er ook nog zat mensen die vonden dat het wel normaal is om andere mensen te misbruiken en vermoorden. Toch is er gelukkig een eind aan gekomen. Het einde voor de veehouderij is gewoon nabij.
    1
  5597. Kip Kip Je vergeet dat de veehouderij nooit van de een op de andere dag zal stoppen. Dat is een proces van decennia dat nu al in gang is gezet. De financiële effecten zijn daardoor vele malen kleiner dan jij doet lijken. Aan financiële middelen die de overheid nodig heeft voor de compensatie van veehouders en werknemers draag ik met veel plezier mijn steentje bij via mijn inkomstenbelasting. Verder maak je de klassieke fout door veehouders en akkerbouwes op één hoop te gooien onder de noemer ‘boeren’. We hebben het hier over veehouders, niet over boeren in het algemeen. Akkerbouw is fantastisch en iets dat we keihard nodig zullen blijven hebben. Een branche waarin Nederland en Wageningen internationaal zal kunnen blijven uitblinken. Veehouderij hoort daar in de toekomst niet meer bij. Net zoals het winnen en verwerken van aardolie in de toekomst tot het verleden zal behoren bijvoorbeeld.
    1
  5598. Kip Kip Ik vind het niet erg dat dieren andere dieren eten omdat het daar gaat om of A: carnivoren of B: pure overleving of C: gebrek aan besef van ethiek. Het unieke van de menselijke diersoort is dat we ons nu zodanig ontwikkeld hebben dat het compleet onnodig is geworden om dode dieren in onze mond te stoppen. Oftewel voortschrijdend inzicht. Iets dat andere diersoorten niet zodanig hebben ontwikkeld.
    1
  5599. Kip Kip Nope. Zoals gezegd, het is een transitie van decennia. Je verzint problemen die er niet zullen zijn.
    1
  5600. Kip Kip Ik ben gewoon realistisch. Het zal helaas decennia duren voordat de veehouderij verdwenen is. Voor het klimaat en de dieren inderdaad liever gisteren dan vandaag. Maar verdwijnen zal het 👍🏻
    1
  5601. Kip Kip Inderdaad, nood breekt wet. Echter bevinden we ons heden ten dage nooit in een noodsituatie dus jouw scenario van miljarden mensen die zelf op zoek gaan naar vleesch is niet realistisch.
    1
  5602. Kip Kip Ga je nou maar even inlezen over wat klimaatverandering precies is want nu begin je alles door elkaar te halen.
    1
  5603. Nope
    1
  5604. Hydrogen cars are heavy, just like EVs.
    1
  5605.  @matskjellstrand7730  Yeah depending on the model it may differ a few hundred kilo. Despite that, EVs still consume only a third of the energy per kilometer.
    1
  5606.  @matskjellstrand7730  Major losses in hydrogen compression and conversion in the fuel cell.
    1
  5607.  @matskjellstrand7730  And then there is losses in production, compression and transport. These steps cannot be eliminated. Total efficiency remains about 20 to 30%.
    1
  5608.  @matskjellstrand7730  There are much more efficient ways to harness excess power (charging electric cars, heat storage). Hydrogen will never be anywhere near 100% efficient, even if you use waste heat.
    1
  5609.  @matskjellstrand7730  The point is that it will never get anywhere near 80 to 90%. There is always an average number of EVs charging at any given time of the day. Perfect for peak shaving.
    1
  5610. Not at all. Synthetic fuels are absolutely terrible and hydrogen is almost as bad. Both are unbelievably inefficient due to laws of physics and this will never change. EVs have been efficient since day 1.
    1
  5611.  @robinoconnor1203  just simple physics
    1
  5612. Hydrogen is not the answer.
    1
  5613. Yeah lets just ignore reality instead right?
    1
  5614. We can live without meat and dairy.
    1
  5615.  @CybertuxSpain  Regeneratie dient inderdaad niet vergeten te worden.
    1
  5616.  @jouniairplanevideos  Je hebt je er duidelijk nooit in verdiept. Waterstofauto's zijn al een gepasseerd station. Met de razendsnelle ontwikkeling van accu's blijven er letterlijk geen voordelen voor waterstof meer over, alleen nadelen.
    1
  5617.  @jouniairplanevideos  En jij dacht dat brandstofcellen en elektrolysers zomaar uit de lucht komen vallen? Ook hier moeten edelmetalen voor gedolven worden zoals platinum. Een beetje brandstofcel is tevens veel eerder versleten dan een accu en waterstofauto's hebben ook kleine lithium-ionaccu's aan boord. Daarnaast zijn waterstofauto's veel complexer en hebben veel meer onderhoud nodig. En dit alles met een extreem inefficiënte auto tot gevolg (een accu-auto verbruikt slechts een derde van de energie). Lithium is nog lang niet op en het produceren van accu's wordt steeds goedkoper en efficienter. Morderne accu's gaan vele tonnen aan kilometers mee en worden dan hergebruikt en uiteindelijk gerecycled. Vliegtuigen zijn inderdaad een ander verhaal, maar voor auto's en waarschijnlijk ook vrachtwagens is waterstof gewoon over.
    1
  5618. There is not time to let people chose themselves.
    1
  5619. Compressed air powered cars are very inefficient and therefore require a lot of electricity. Not an option.
    1
  5620.  @jameshall5171  But that is only a tiiiiny part of the energy loss.
    1
  5621. Not really. Battery electric for pretty much all road vehicles, with some exceptions for very long or heavy haul trucks (hydrogen).
    1
  5622. You are comparing the wrong things. Hydrogen is the energy carrier so it should be compared to the electrons in the battery. The hydrogen tanks hold the medium, like the battery holds the electrons. Materials for batteries only have to be mined once for a vehicle. Hydrogen itself has to be produced for every single kilometer the vehicle drives.
    1
  5623.  @MumbiYamba  Material mining is something completely different than causing direct CO2 emissions by burning fossil fuels. We will always need to mine materials. Guess what, for hydrogen cars we need lithium, cobalt, nickel and platinum as well. Hydrogen cars do not solve the mining problem. And no, the EV industry does not claim that it doesn't harm the environment. It helps lowering emissions. The big problem with hydrogen cars is that they require three times more electricity to drive than a EV does. We do not have an abundance of low carbon electricity and will not have that for a very long time. With hydrogen cars this point of 100% renewable energy is pushed even further away because it requires so much more of it. Minimising energy consumption is the best thing we can do to lower emissions as fast as possible.
    1
  5624. Nee.
    1
  5625. Why not have a backup generator for your home and your car?
    1
  5626. henny jr Ik ben regelmatig op boerderijen geweest. Dit is echter niet relevant. Het gaat immers om het principe, niet om de uitvoering. Dieren gebruiken voor financieel gewin en ze vervolgens vermoorden zonder dat ze er ooit toestemming voor hebben gegeven is mishandeling en moord. In de toekomst zullen we verafschuwend terugkijken op de intensieve veehouderij, vergelijkbaar met hoe we nu naar het slavernijverleden kijken.
    1
  5627. haha ja als jij iets niet leuk vindt dan is het op eens propaganda. Goed verhaal.
    1
  5628. 🤡
    1
  5629. Far less likely to break down anyway.
    1
  5630. Onzin
    1
  5631.  @bartdeking exact.
    1
  5632. Simply wouldn't make a considerable difference.
    1
  5633. MMO Archives True, but I think it’s even less than that.
    1
  5634. It will always remain terribly inefficient.
    1
  5635.  @psychoticcapybara9362  The future will not change laws of physics. Hydrogen cars were inefficient 20 years ago and they still are.
    1
  5636.  @psychoticcapybara9362  You are mixing up technological advancement and laws of physics. EVs have been efficient from day one due to physics, but lacked in range and charging speed. Both things were fixed by improving the technology. Hydrogen cars will always remain far less efficient than battery electric cars because producing, compressing, transporting and converting hydrogen is paired with a lot of losses. Improvement is possible, but elimination of these steps is not. It's that simple.
    1
  5637. In case of gas: less than 50% in stationary applications.
    1
  5638. These vehicles have batteries on board as well. So yes, they can. But that still doesn't make them good cars.
    1
  5639. en de wappies slikken het als zoete koek
    1
  5640. Aansteller
    1
  5641. EVs are always better, no matter where the electricity comes from.
    1
  5642. Dude, read the other comments. Literally thousands complain about the same thing. But it's not relevant because, guess what, hydrogen cars ALSO require lithium batteries, carbon fiber hydrogen tanks, and fuel cells with platinum in them. They ALSO require manufacturing, they ALSO wear out and need to be replaced and they ALSO need to be recycled.
    1
  5643. Je hebt duidelijk geen flauw benul
    1
  5644. It’s not impossible at all.
    1
  5645.  @Robert-j6r8c  I don’t see a problem in that?
    1
  5646.  @Robert-j6r8c  Change costs money. Fossil fuel prices will go through the roof anyway in the future so we have no choice. What is the source of that 25% figure by the way?
    1
  5647. Sure, TDI is great but the emissions are horrible.
    1
  5648. Too damn inefficient.
    1
  5649.  @vacuumfireradio253  That doesn’t change anything about the bad efficiency. With that same amount of solar energy you could charge three EV’s. Pretty much all road vehicles will eventually be battery electric.
    1
  5650.  @vacuumfireradio253  Available solar energy is very limited and will remain so for the next few decades. Using fuel cell cars in an insane waste of precious (solar) energy.
    1
  5651.  @vacuumfireradio253  The Bob Lazar story is a famous scam and has nothing to do with real fuel cell cars.
    1
  5652.  @vacuumfireradio253  They are both fraudsters. Solar energy is limited by the amount of solar panels available, which is and remains very limited.
    1
  5653.  @vacuumfireradio253  They both propagate the usage of hydrogen in combustion engines. This is dumb because this has even worse efficiency than fuel cells.
    1
  5654. There exist MUCH more fast chargers than hydrogen stations.
    1
  5655. Hybrids were cool 20 years ago.
    1
  5656. The reason is that you need gigantic amounts of land to supply the world with bio fuels. Fuel vs. food conflicts will then be unavoidable.
    1
  5657. Vooral in Nederland, in mindere mate ook in Duitsland en België.
    1
  5658. Internal combustion engines are too inefficient.
    1
  5659. Incorrect, but you just don’t like reality.
    1
  5660. Lol not even close
    1
  5661. there is 1 problem: it is fucking inefficient.
    1
  5662. Nope it is not.
    1
  5663. AleMaaL een cOmplOtT!!1
    1
  5664.  @snowrabbit9558  Hé nog een wappie
    1
  5665. These ‘technologies’ do simply not work. They are not blocked or buried in any way.
    1
  5666.  @stevenstidham13  Get your head around some basic physics.
    1
  5667. Well done Frank. I am working on HV grid capacity expansion on a daily basis in the Netherlands.
    1
  5668. You have clearly never taken a minute to inform yourself on EVs.
    1
  5669.  @IansOddInterests  Yup that is exactly what I mean. Pretty much all not relevant or myths. Bottom line is: driving electric is always cleaner than using gasoline or diesel. No matter what.
    1
  5670. You are acting as if we have a choice. Of course it takes years to upgrade the grid. So what? We simply have to and it will all be worth it. Nobody claims we are switching to EVs within a year. It is a transition that will take 1 to 2 decades.
    1
  5671. Verklaar u nader
    1
  5672. 1. They are locked in position 2. They carry high voltage electricity
    1
  5673.  @michelguijt8863  goed verhaal.
    1
  5674. Lol why would they.
    1
  5675. Electrification will actually lower total energy demand. Electricity is always cleaner than burning diesel in an engine.
    1
  5676.  @eric8372  Correct, so in a worst case scenario this will be supplied by fossil fueled power stations for the time being.
    1
  5677. Tip: Zoek even het verschil op tussen CO2 en stikstof.
    1
  5678.  @SirDavothe2  Pretty much all surplus from wind and solar will in the near future be consumed by charging cars and stationary batteries. Much more efficient, much easier 👍🏻
    1
  5679. already exists
    1
  5680.  @TajulIslam-ei7gd  Of course we can but that does not make it any less inefficient. Electric cars only require 1/3rd of the number of solar panels / power stations. Using hydrogen is not ‘diversifying’ energy sources. Hydrogen = electricity and hydrogen consumes vast amounts of precious renewable electricity that could otherwise have been used in a much better way.
    1
  5681. Als we niks veranderen wordt de natuur kapot gemaakt.
    1
  5682. Worst of both worlds
    1
  5683. It DOES matter because solar and wind energy are not free and will never be free and they are also not abundant at all.
    1
  5684. Nee!!! terug naar de stoomboten en -treinen!!!11! fuck luchtkwaliteit!!1
    1
  5685.  @vintageb8  exactly
    1
  5686. why not?
    1
  5687. Current batteries last longer than the vehicle itself. Fuel cells also deteriorate. Fast charging often takes less than half an hour. The energy source is not so relevant. The point is that a fuel cell car uses three times more of that exact same (renewable or non renewable) electric energy.
    1
  5688. ​ @daloshea6723  Especially for consumers fuel cell cars make no sense. Most EV owners charge during the night, so charging time = 0 minutes. Fast charging is only done occasionally and half an hour break after a few hundred kilometers is something you do anyway. Current EVs are already capable of achieving similar ranges as fuel cell vehicles for only 1/3rd of the cost and energy consumption. The energy source is not relevant in this comparison because EVs are always cleaner than ICE or fuel cell cars because they are so efficient. Even on non-renewable energy an EV emits less CO2 than a petrol or diesel car.
    1
  5689. ​ @daloshea6723  1. Public slow chargers in the street fixes this. Works well where I live. 2. Fuel cell vehicles are not expected to make big progress range wise because that would require an even larger tank or even more compression (and thus even lower efficiency). 3. Why do you think it is easier to acquire green energy for hydrogen production while the whole process requires 3X more energy? It obviously is not. 4. The air purification feature is just a little gimmick and does not form a good argument for fuel cell vehicle adoption. It would be much wiser to just go for EVs and spend the enormous amounts of energy saved on powering stationary air purification appliances. Also: if we all drive zero emission vehicles in the future there is not much air to clean anyway.
    1
  5690. Goed bezig! Maar waarom nog koken op gas? Je betaalt waarschijnlijk meer aan vastrecht dan aan kuub gas per jaar.
    1
  5691.  @robvanderpeijl1326  ook begrijpelijk!
    1
  5692. Great choice.
    1
  5693. Less efficient.
    1
  5694.  @corblimey8729 kWh
    1
  5695. Of course not. Petrol and diesel are over soon.
    1
  5696. I think everybody knows how this is not relevant.
    1
  5697.  @tugtjfhkojgbvh  Efficiency.
    1
  5698. De veehouderij opheffen zou een zeer positieve verandering zijn.
    1
  5699.  @jetbolink7278  Akkerbouwers produceren meer dan genoeg eten.
    1
  5700.  @Crosscors  Alsnog vele malen beter dan gas in de fik steken.
    1
  5701.  @tomhoornstra1379 en terecht.
    1
  5702. If you still think this proves anything in 2024 you are absolutely clueless about climate change.
    1
  5703. Lol electric is the only sensible thing to do.
    1
  5704. LOL En jij dacht dat waterstof gewoon uit de lucht komt vallen?
    1
  5705. pascal van der helm Waterstof maken en erop rijden is ontzettend inefficient. Een waterstofauto verbruikt drie keer zo veel stroom als een elektrische auto met een accu. Om deze reden is waterstof kansloos en een al lang en breed gepasseerd station. Alle autofabrikanten richten zich op accu-auto’s. En nee, rijden op benzine is niet schoner dan elektrisch. Het is een hardnekkig misverstand.
    1
  5706. You are wrong and you are just pulling some numbers out of thin air. Take a deep breath and inform yourself. All the information is easy to find.
    1
  5707.  @peterv6036  Precies, moet je ook eens proberen
    1
  5708.  @rocky965able  Very inefficient and you will have to wait for infrastructure to develop, which is unlikely for passenger cars.
    1
  5709. Yes, the SUV trend is terrible, but EVs are far from pointless. They are the only future.
    1
  5710. In de zeldzame situaties die jij schetst rijd je gewoon effe naar een snellaadstation en pomp je 'm binnen een half uur naar de 80%.
    1
  5711. 1. Weight doesn't change too much about efficiency. 2. Regarding mining, you thought that fuel cells come falling from the sky for free? 3. Most fuel cells degrade faster than current batteries. Current Tesla batteries last many hundreds of thousands of kilometers.
    1
  5712. Are you telling me this doesn’t exist yet in the USA?
    1
  5713. So explain where the energy comes from for the on-board hydrogen production...
    1
  5714.  @TheDirtyBirchTrails  Yes. No source of energy to be found.
    1
  5715. You forgot something...
    1
  5716.  @t.w.3  That's really nice. Hope to make electric road trips too one day.
    1
  5717.  @triadwarfare  They do. Look up lithium iron phosphate. Has been around for years and many EVs rely on it. No cobalt, no nickel.
    1
  5718.  @Shoprestorationthe  You are wrong. Why would a more sustainable solution have to be perfect in order to replace a far more polluting solution? The point is that it is a huge improvement. And no, the range does not drop dramatically in winter.
    1
  5719.  @slappevaatdoek  Uitstoot beperken is in het algemene belang.
    1
  5720. Not really as batteries will be recycled.
    1
  5721. Het is wel een tesla-probleem. Met EVs gaat het goed.
    1
  5722. It doesn’t make much sense to charge them with fossil energy. So, renewables.
    1
  5723.  @skylershank9309  Batteries will prevent just that.
    1
  5724.  @skylershank9309  as I said, they are charged by renewables
    1
  5725. 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
  5726.  @kronosaurelius  Take a look at this: https://images.app.goo.gl/dGtSeJRf7ioPa7JP9
    1
  5727. yes you would
    1
  5728. It is possible but charging from solar will be very slow. We will always need charging stations.
    1
  5729. Drum brakes are totally fine, especially on EVs
    1
  5730. Pretty normal for wealthy people and great for the rest because we need A LOT of used EVs fast.
    1
  5731.  @Bl00dMalice  Yes, that is why the EV revolution started there over a decade ago and now the rest of the world is slowly able to participate due to lower prices.
    1
  5732. 😂
    1
  5733. 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
  5734. Zoals je weet is waterstof verschrikkelijk inefficiënt. Inzet hiervan voor wegvervoer en het verwarmen van woningen is dus ook gigantische verspilling van energie, ongeacht hoe deze is opgewekt. Er zijn meer dan genoeg grondstoffen op aarde voor een mondiale energietransitie, inclusief grootschalige productie van accu's.
    1
  5735. And a normal car emits a lot more CO2...
    1
  5736. EVs are great. It’s Elon that is the problem unfortunately.
    1
  5737.  @rzgaming185 Er zijn ontelbaar veel technische kantoorbanen.
    1
  5738. Doordat vleeseters vlees willen, moeten dieren nog veel meer soja vrete….
    1
  5739.  @nielsvanwoonunitcompleet  Het is een feit dat dieren in de veeindustrie grote hoeveelheden sojaschroot consumeren.
    1
  5740.  @nielsvanwoonunitcompleet  De dieren in de veeindustrie worden gefokt en zouden anders dus niet bestaan. Het produceren van vlees en zuivel is heel erg inefficient waardoor je heel veel voer (onder andere soja) nodig hebt om een bepaalde hoeveelheid voedsel te maken. Je bespaart dus heel veel plantaardig materiaal als je gewoon direct groente in je mond stopt. snap je?
    1
  5741. Yeah the 500e is really cool.
    1
  5742.  @AwoudeX  Nee, die is vergrendeld.
    1
  5743. Except that that would be incredibly inefficient and require about 5 times more electric energy.
    1
  5744. "Stikstof is CO2" Ok goed verhaal..
    1
  5745. Why not? You forgot what Russia has been doing since feb 2022?
    1
  5746.  @JanNowak-q7m  I know
    1
  5747. It's the other way around. Oil lobby loves hydrogen.
    1
  5748. First, second and third question is answered in the video.
    1
  5749. Lol natural gas produces a lot of CO2.
    1
  5750. oh yes.
    1
  5751. The challenge is, and always remains, to increase efficiency. But that is impossible.
    1
  5752. Het gaat om nieuwe auto's.
    1
  5753. Friso van Bolhuis Ja, maar dat is geen fossiele CO2.
    1
  5754. So what do you propose as an alternative?
    1
  5755. Nee. De accu is op nieuw uitgevonden.
    1
  5756. Still far better than anything else.
    1
  5757.  @Nabil538-h9n Veel te inefficient
    1
  5758. echt he, het wemelt er van.
    1
  5759. gelukkig maar!
    1
  5760. Inform yourself
    1
  5761. Hydrogen is too inefficient. Other chemistries are indeed partly a solution. LFP has proven itself well already.
    1
  5762.  @prosperity-7-fortune  Lithium iron phosphate battery
    1
  5763. Een gemiddelde EV verbruikt 10 kWh per dag. Dat is absoluut geen probleem voor het elektriciteitsnet.
    1
  5764.  @rjelt5648 exact, dynamisch laden is de oplossing
    1
  5765. An EV using fossil electricity is a lot less polluting than a comparable gasoline car. It always makes sense to buy an EV.
    1
  5766. You are stuck in 2010?
    1
  5767.  @Jst12341  There is a question mark.
    1
  5768.  @Jst12341  Well it’s an appropriate statement as well.
    1
  5769.  @Jst12341  The idea that electric cars belong in the city and that they have a range that is not usable fits perfectly in 2010.
    1
  5770.  @Jst12341  What are you talking about? There are exactly 4 Superchargers between Cheyenne and Salt Lake City and many more in Wyoming itself. That route is absolutely no problem in any Tesla.
    1
  5771. ok wappie
    1
  5772. Barely any statistic is supporting these claims.
    1
  5773. You would need 3 times as many windturbines though 😂
    1
  5774. 1. This is not about CO2. 2. Meanwhile China is the world leader in building wind and solar.
    1
  5775. You just think they are.
    1
  5776. you have no idea
    1
  5777. Yes, EVs are the best option by far.
    1
  5778.  @piotrtrebisz6602  Correct, but less than 10% of crude is used for synthetic materials. So if 90% of all other oil applications eventually disappear there is only a VERY small part left.
    1
  5779. 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
  5780. Won’t take long before you realize.
    1
  5781. Much better compared to burning petroleum products.
    1
  5782. Dit is een van de slechtste weken van het jaar, dus nauwelijks relevant. In Nederland is genoeg wind en zon om beide zeer rendabel te maken. Niemand beweert dat we op korte termijn alle elektriciteit uit wind en zon kunnen halen. Wel is het de bedoeling om dit aandeel zo groot mogelijk te maken. Daarom is het van groot belang dat dit soort krankzinnig hoge molens in grote getalen geplaatst blijven worden.
    1
  5783. Why do you wonder? You know monthly tax on diesels is very high right?
    1
  5784.  @janversteeg6704  Er ligt een schitterend plan klaar.
    1
  5785.  @gregorymalchuk272  So what? As we all know, the grid is powered by several different sources of energy.
    1
  5786. hydrogen is super dumb
    1
  5787. That is not the problem. Electric is always cleaner, even if we would mainly use fossil power generation.
    1
  5788. blackmagicmach Most lithium is extracted from brine lakes by evaporation.
    1
  5789. Zeg het maar, wat stel jij voor?
    1
  5790.  @MarksElectricLife  absolutely agree. I was just curious
    1
  5791.  @garethrobinson2275  So it is possible to use 100% of a barrel of crude to make plastics?
    1
  5792. Überhaupt nicht. Elektroautos sind Wasserstoff ganz weit vorbei.
    1
  5793. Caloric value is not equal to efficiency.
    1
  5794.  @allangibson2408  In the future there will be so many battery applications (mainly EVs) that there wont be much excess left.
    1
  5795. You are so clueless
    1
  5796.  @zen4men  Political parties on the left side of the political spectrum are doing the most to preserve nature and prevent climate change from getting even worse.
    1
  5797. Wrong. VAWTs have lower efficiency than regular turbines: https://www.luvside.de/en/vawt-disadvantages/
    1
  5798.  @trashmammal454  Exactly.
    1
  5799.  @hwirtwirt4500 E-Transit EV specific?!
    1
  5800. EV adoption needs to take place as fast as possible. Not something you want to put in the hands of consumers.
    1
  5801. Wat een onzin. Alle auto’s zijn zuiniger bij een lagere snelheid. En nee, waterstof is geen goed idee. Gelukkig is het allang een gepasseerd station en worden alle auto’s gewoon elektrisch.
    1
  5802.  @thereckon3592  True, but it is a well known fact that EVs are the least polluting option.
    1
  5803.  @thereckon3592  Oh yes. Hydrogen vehicles are so inefficient that they require 3 times more electric energy which makes it very hard to win from battery electric vehicles. We know that older EVs are doing better than expected regarding battery life and current generation EVs have batteries what will easily last 15 years. It is very likely the battery will outlive the rest of the vehicle in most cases.
    1
  5804.  @thereckon3592  You can find several life cycle analysis reports that cover exactly this kind of comparison.
    1
  5805.  @thereckon3592  Google ‘life cycle analysis battery electric vs hydrogen’.
    1
  5806. Mit Ionity Passport bekommst du 1 kWh für 39 cent.
    1
  5807.  @GerardvanVooren  Zegt klimaatverandering je toevallig iets?
    1
  5808.  @GerardvanVooren  zucht
    1
  5809.  @ikkeben1024  hé we hebben een wappie
    1
  5810. Vegetables.
    1
  5811. Sie glauben es gibt eine Alternative?
    1
  5812. Yeah good luck with the alternative then
    1
  5813. Not really.
    1
  5814. and it is insanely inefficient.
    1
  5815. Come on, it’s 2024 and all data is clear and easy to find: life cycle emissions of EVs are far lower.
    1
  5816. Nothing is perfect. Still a lot less worse than the alternative though.
    1
  5817. Neejo, waterstof is allang een gepasseerd station. Accu's zullen natuurlijk nog verbeteringen doormaken, maar teruggaan naar dat gekke waterstofidee gaat echt niet gebeuren hoor.
    1
  5818.  @SamsonBiggz  Public chargers along the street...
    1
  5819. Not necessary at all. A few companies tried it, but fast charging has proven to be much more effective. And no, hydrogen and alcohol are not greener options.
    1
  5820. You still need trucks, cargo trains or not.
    1
  5821. Er hangt al een gigantische gratis kernfusiecentrale in de lucht, ook wel bekend als de zon. Energie uit zonnepanelen is eigenlijk gewoon indirecte kernfusie.
    1
  5822.  @Gazer75  And petrol and diesel
    1
  5823.  @carholic-sz3qv  Absolutely and even more so by that time.
    1
  5824.  @bertjesklotepino  The cooling towers are part of the power generating process and actually contribute to the actual overall efficiency of the power plant. Look up Rankine cycle. The amount of heat escaping from the cooling tower is actually too low to use for anything substantial.
    1
  5825.  @bertjesklotepino  Alright, will have a look
    1
  5826. Both solutions produce far more CO2
    1
  5827.  @brianjones7660  Far less damaging than using fossil fuels.
    1
  5828. Well total energy demand decreases due to electrification. Quite a lot of capacity will become available when refineries shut down for example.
    1
  5829.  @michaelpapadopoulos6054 exactly
    1
  5830. It is not because of special regulations that allow electric trucks to be heavier.
    1
  5831. Nepnieuws. In werkelijkheid ligt het tussen de 20.000 en 40.000 km.
    1
  5832. Not at all because it would terribly inefficient.
    1
  5833.  @gufranansari9286  Still very inefficient. The whole point is that it would require A LOT of renewable energy. About 5 times as much compared to battery electric trucks. So that would mean building and maintaing 5 times as many solar panels, wind turbines, powerstations etc. for the same number of vehicles.
    1
  5834. Well Sam, he didn't include emissions for fuel cells and fuel tank either right?
    1
  5835.  @samd1405  Lithium mining is mainly done by evaporation of brine water. Of course there will be emissions related to this, but this is not something to be very concerned about. Battery production emissions are currently in total at about 100 kg of CO2 per kWh according to the latest research. Not bad at all.
    1
  5836. ​ @samd1405  Brine is not the same as sea water. The vast amount of lithium comes from brine lakes. A smaller part is mined from hard rock.
    1
  5837.  @samd1405  About 2/3 for brines. I have read a lot about EV battery production. Here is a nice report: https://www.ivl.se/download/18.34244ba71728fcb3f3faf9/1591706083170/C444.pdf
    1
  5838. That is correct.
    1
  5839. Well, pretty safe actually. And much less polluting than burning insane amounts of petroleum products.
    1
  5840. Sure but it is horribly ineffcient.
    1
  5841.  @zad08  Not really. It is just physics.
    1
  5842. EVs are always cleaner
    1
  5843. Ga weg
    1
  5844. Gelukkig wel ja. Jij prefereert ongezonde lucht?
    1
  5845. It's not relevant.
    1
  5846. Because combustion engines are even more inefficient than a fuel cell. Therefore cost per mile will be higher.
    1
  5847. Akkerbouwers ja, veehouders moeten zeker niet met rust gelaten worden.
    1
  5848. Zoals?
    1
  5849. Je vergeet de stikstofuitstoot.
    1
  5850.  @xf4slv817  Stikstofuitstoot is de enige reden dat 100 km per uur is ingevoerd.
    1
  5851.  @Thesamurai1999  Just a matter of development of charging networks.
    1
  5852. Emissions are always lower, even if mainly coal is used.
    1
  5853.  @lidysellink2221  Lees je eens in.
    1
  5854. 010 nee
    1
  5855.  @supermete10  Bron?
    1
  5856. Hydrogen is not a great option. That is the whole point.
    1
  5857. It’s more the lack of efficiency that is the problem.
    1
  5858. Batteries rarely require replacement. And even if they have to they are easy to remove from the bottom side.
    1
  5859.  @MyNameIsNotEmail.ItsEmail  Only some early Model S Teslas suffered from battery problems.
    1
  5860.  @MyNameIsNotEmail.ItsEmail  Modern EV batteries will easily last 10+ years, probably outlasting the vehicle itself.
    1
  5861.  @MyNameIsNotEmail.ItsEmail  That is what I said. 10 plus years. Current batteries easily last 12 years. The first generation Teslas are now 9 years old. The batteries used in current Teslas are heavily improved.
    1
  5862.  @MyNameIsNotEmail.ItsEmail  Correct. I never denied those two points.
    1
  5863. of course the battery is temperature regulated.
    1
  5864.  @thedocofgreen2018  Tesla vehicles have always had this feature.
    1
  5865. Using hydrogen in ICE is out of the question.
    1
  5866. Lol recent history has proven that wind and solar massively dropped energy prices.
    1
  5867.  @anthonymorris5084  Well the statement ‘energy prises have skyrocketed’ is so laughable that it was totally justified. Just look up the day ahead prices in case of sunny or windy weather and you will see prices plummet or even become negative.
    1
  5868.  @anthonymorris5084  Just look at the electricity prices during sunny and windy days. Gas power stations are shutting off because the price is too low. Gas and renewables will remain a great combination for a quite a long time while renewables keep expanding.
    1
  5869.  @anthonymorris5084  And again you refuse to look at the actual numbers. And obviously ‘running a country on renewables’ is a completely different argument. The point was if renewables bring electricity prices down, which they do.
    1
  5870. Een klein deel ongetwijfeld, maar voor het maken van staal moet je steenkool verbanden.
    1
  5871. Suriprofz Je hebt je duidelijk niet goed ingelezen.
    1
  5872. Het elektriciteitsnet wordt uiteraard opgewaardeerd. Alles wordt elektrisch.
    1
  5873.  @07_sev52  Uiteraard. Snelladen is echter geen dagelijkse aangelegenheid dus vormt ook geen bedreiging voor het (middenspannings)net.
    1
  5874. They are not.
    1
  5875. ‘How green is that’. Well: a lot greener than using an ICE car.
    1
  5876.  @mgcarmkm4520  Not at all. Again: Despite the things you mentioned, an EV is less polluting.
    1
  5877.  @mgcarmkm4520  Go to google and type in: lifecycle emissions windturbines. And do the same for EVs. Good luck.
    1
  5878. Lars rbn xplr Dat wordt ook niet beweerd. Kijk de video nog eens. De vraag is: heeft corona een positief effect op de uitstoot en de natuur. Het antwoord is: ja.
    1
  5879. Because it is VERY inefficient.
    1
  5880. Not true. EVs are far superior in emissions.
    1
  5881.  @tysonswing  I was obviously referring to lifecycle emissions. And EV batteries outlast the rest of the vehicle.
    1
  5882. The reason is that hydrogen is just a super inefficient way to store energy.
    1
  5883.  @sexcydotcom  True. EVs FTW👍🏻
    1
  5884. How much do you normally drive per day?
    1
  5885.  @illgoat  It's a well known fact that hydrogen fuel cell tech is horribly inefficient.
    1
  5886.  @illgoat  Energy density is not a definition for efficiency. A hydrogen fuel cell car literary consumes three times the amount of energy of an EV.
    1
  5887.  @illgoat  There is a factor three difference. Far from nearly as efficient. Compressed air is even worse indeed.
    1
  5888.  @illgoat  Correct. That doesn't change anything about my comment on the huge difference in efficiency.
    1
  5889. Don't worry, the vast majority of emergency vehicles will be battery electric soon too. They already exist in other places.
    1
  5890. The MG ZS EV is Chinese and being sold in Europe.
    1
  5891. Yeah lets just create gigantic bodies of water everywhere out of nothing.
    1
  5892. That’s another 8 years to go. More than enough.
    1
  5893. LPG is a mixture of butane and propane. CNG and LNG are methane.
    1
  5894. BEV is the best solution simply because of physics.
    1
  5895.  @fishanator69  Dus minder olie verkopen.
    1
  5896. Het gaat om veehouders, niet boeren in het algemeen.
    1
  5897. Lol. Current batteries outlast the vehicle. Fuel cells wear out much faster than any battery.
    1
  5898. Possibly, but in the near future trucks will be battery electric too. Musk knows what to focus on. Hydrogen would be a massive waste of energy and money.
    1
  5899. Yea they are catching up. Norway is still leading though.
    1
  5900. Het is duidelijk wie hier de echte wappie is.
    1
  5901. Wrong choice
    1
  5902.  @strang1124  Emissions are at least 3 times higher than an EV...
    1
  5903.  @strang1124  Hydrogen either requires shitloads of natural gas (= lots of CO2) or shitloads of electricity (= lots of CO2).
    1
  5904.  @strang1124  The picture is about comparing battery electric vehicles to hydrogen vehicles and vehicles on synthetic fuel. This has nothing to do with biomass.
    1
  5905.  @strang1124  I never talked about trees. Try refuelling your hydrogen car during an outage.
    1
  5906. Je hebt echt geen flauw idee he
    1
  5907.  @martinlacey8110  Dude. Once again. First you need energy to make the hydrogen on board. Then you feed it into the combustion engine. So where does THAT energy come from. Basic physics.
    1
  5908. Martin Lacey Martin please, do yourself a favor and buy yourself a nice book about thermodynamics / physics in general.
    1
  5909. Electricity prices have been dropping quite a lot recently. Gasoline prices are also very volatile as we all know now. In the end and EV will always cost you less, especially if you can charge at home.
    1
  5910. So much BS. There is loads of research that proves that life cycle emissions of electric vehicles are always lower than comparable combustion engine cars. No matter what.
    1
  5911. But the Tesla Supercharger network is soon going to be available for any EV.
    1
  5912. Then you should use D.
    1
  5913. Omdat motorfietsen met een verbrandingsmotor gewoon ooit niet meer verkocht zullen mogen worden. Daarom.
    1
  5914. Never 😂
    1
  5915. You should realise that hydrogen vehicles require 3 times more energy than an EV. So three times as many wind turbines and solar panels have to be built and maintained. Current EV batteries will last just as long as the vehicles themselves.
    1
  5916. Barely makes a difference. FCEVs are heavy as well by the way.
    1
  5917. Losses are MUCH lower than what occurs in the hydrogen ecosystem. The video describes efficiencies during use, not production. They didn’t mention production emissions for batteries, fuel cells and hydrogen tanks that are required for hydrogen cars either.
    1
  5918.  @Phill0old  Provide a source for that 5%. Even if that were true, future recycling percentages will be much higher. EV batteries outlast the vehicle itself. You only need one. The average car lasts 12 years and it is the average numbers that count. About 10% losses in distribution is quite accurate indeed.
    1
  5919.  @Phill0old  Correct. The batteries will be reused in stationary applications for years before they get recycled. First gen Nissan Leafs were quite bad due to lack of active battery cooling. This is a non-existing problem in today's EVs.
    1
  5920.  @Phill0old  I asked you for a source first. Like I said, even if it were true it doesn't say anything about the near future. Many companies are currently ramping up recycling capacity. There is currently not much to recycle anyway in the first place because the batteries last much longer than you think.
    1
  5921.  @Phill0old  I was just asking for your source. Again, I am claiming that EV battery recycling is barely necessary currently. EVs have only been around in serious numbers for less than 10 years. That's shorter than most of the batteries last.
    1
  5922.  @engineeringtheweirdguy2103  That is exactly not the case. The hydrogen car consumes literally three (3) times more energy per kilometer due to the losses in production of hydrogen (AFTER the electric energy was generated), compression, transport and conversion in the fuel cell in the car.
    1
  5923.  @engineeringtheweirdguy2103  You are right, I know that but I misunderstood your first comment. Sorry!
    1
  5924. Lol that is not how statistics work.
    1
  5925.  @daryappabiradar8618 Correct
    1
  5926. 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
  5927. 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
  5928. Well said
    1
  5929. EV is great
    1
  5930. It’s more about the difference between real world driving and official tests like WLTP. The heater may increase consumption by about 5 - 10%
    1
  5931. But emissions will be far higher than EVs
    1
  5932. We = Shell. Dus dat gaat niet enkel om het Groningse gas.
    1
  5933. But it still is horribly inefficient.
    1
  5934. Totally wrong. Musk doesn't care about hydrogen because it simply is an inferior and stupid technology for cars. The petroleum industry loves hydrogen because they dream of being able to continue production and handling of gaseous fuels.
    1
  5935.  @nicksofialakis1448  You have no clue: https://www.shell.com/energy-and-innovation/new-energies/hydrogen.html https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/news-and-insights/reimagining-energy/bp-joins-hydrogen-council.html https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-25/big-oil-s-long-bet-on-hydrogen-offers-a-climate-lifeline
    1
  5936. De Amazone staat niet echt bekend als palmolie producerend gebied. Dit vindt veel meer plaats in Maleisië en Indonesië. Als je iets voor het Amazoneregenwoud wil doen kun je beter stoppen met vlees eten.
    1
  5937. lol!
    1
  5938. Ja want als jij iets niet leuk vindt dan moet het wel propaganda zijn he…
    1
  5939. Not at all
    1
  5940.  @pablorages1241  All false. Inform yourself.
    1
  5941.  @pablorages1241  Electric cars make a decent dent in CO2 emissions and have almost reached price parity. That some legacy automakers have been struggling with profitable EV production is their own fault.
    1
  5942. You have no clue
    1
  5943.  @honesty_-no9he  exactly
    1
  5944. Yes it is, just takes some time
    1
  5945. Interestingly, in Europe heat pumps are very popular in the (cold) Scandinavian countries.
    1
  5946. Hydrogen doesn't make sense both economically and environmentally.
    1
  5947. Lol of course it is caused by the sun. That is the whole concept of the green house effect. The point is that human activities made the glass panes of the green house a lot thicker.
    1
  5948. Outdated argument. Fast chargers are everywhere these days.
    1
  5949. ...30 years ago
    1
  5950.  @hEXordo  Problem is that hydrogen's low efficiency problem is not just a matter of more research and development (which was the case with batteries). Laws of physics (thermodynamics) prevent hydrogen vehicles from becoming considerably more efficient.
    1
  5951.  @ivorleak8823  yes he is.
    1
  5952. Ok wappie
    1
  5953. ⁠ @joshbakker7541  en nog meer wappietheorieen
    1
  5954. 1. Stikstof is een lokaal milieuprobleem, geen klimaatprobleem. 2. Nederland is verre van het beste jongetje van de klas, dat is een bekend misverstand. We hobbelen juist ver achter andere westerse landen aan als het gaat om milieu- en klimaatmaatregelen. Voor een middenweg is het echt al veel en veel te laat.
    1
  5955. You sir, just described a perfect example of a perpetuum mobile.
    1
  5956. Benzine wordt inderdaad waarschijnlijk nog duurder, maar elektrische auto's sowieso goedkoper. Dat gebeurt nu al en is onomkeerbaar.
    1
  5957. Charging at home is still a lot cheaper than buying petrol or diesel.
    1
  5958. Sie glauben CO2 ist kein problem?
    1
  5959. Dat heeft niks met het Amazonegebied te maken.
    1
  5960. Waar heb je het over, de gasprijs ligt al lange tijd weer op een laag niveau, vergelijkbaar met 2019.
    1
  5961. Haha exactly. It is pathetic.
    1
  5962. Plenty of life cycle analysis reports available about this.
    1
  5963.  @TeaJay83  Base models don’t have self driving. It’s up to you. And 1 screen is in fact a lot simpler and cheaper to make.
    1
  5964.  @TeaJay83  All the components you mention are relatively cheap. Is not going to make the difference, not even close.
    1
  5965.  @TeaJay83  Well obviously a big touchscreen on the dashboard is not going to make a fender bender more expensive.
    1
  5966.  @TeaJay83  Again, if you think that these components are the reason that Teslas are ' expensive' you are wrong. The price is determined by the battery, the drivetrain, the body and the fabrication method that puts it all together. The rest is just peanuts. Also: A base Model 3 is one of the most affordable EVs at the moment.
    1
  5967.  @TeaJay83 The model 3 starts at 38k in the USA excluding many thousands of tax credits...
    1
  5968. They will not be the future.
    1
  5969.  @keithbennett1656  It does answer the question. Military vehicles will also be electric eventually.
    1
  5970.  @keithbennett1656  Yes, the majority of these things. Aircraft and ships will keep relying on comubstion engines for a while - preferably burning synthetic fuels.
    1
  5971. Lol
    1
  5972. Yes but the point is that a BEV only requires 1/3 of the amount of electric energy. This makes driving electric the cleanest option of them all because it is so damn efficient, no matter how dirty the electricity is.
    1
  5973. Matthew Digiacomo Not really. Efficiency didn’t increase a lot over the years. Even their first car was already very efficient. That’s not because of Tesla, but because of the fact that battery electric cars are efficient by nature. It is impossible to improve hydrogen’s efficiency significantly due to laws of physics.
    1
  5974.  @matthewdigiacomo2580  Ok, but you should realise that fuel cells also require "rare" earth materials like platinum. Fuel cells also wear out after a while and have to be replaced. FCEVs also contain (smaller) lithium ion batteries for buffering and these tend to wear out rather quickly due to high cycling. And then there a many other components in the car (FCEVs are very complex) and along the infrastructure that need to be manufactured and replaced regularly.
    1
  5975.  @thebrowns5337 great explanation
    1
  5976.  @byrongotcha  Looks interesting as well. Thanks.
    1
  5977.  @buzzman4860  Ok thanks.
    1
  5978.  @shaneyamaha450  It will always remain very inefficient
    1
  5979.  @shaneyamaha450  You are clueless. Cars get scrapped anyway as they last less than 15 years. The switch to EVs simply happens in a natural way. Again: you are ignoring the terrible inefficiency. Which means the world would need to construct and maintain 5 times as many solar panels, wind turbines, power stations, etcetera just so we can stick to combustion engines.
    1
  5980.  @_TbT_  Correct
    1
  5981.  @beedoox5613  You have no clue about lithium mining. You might be confused with some other material.
    1
  5982.  @karandeepsingh3606  Even if 100% of the electricity comes from fossil sources driving electric is still less polluting.
    1
  5983. Battery tech has hugely improved. Battery degradation is barely an issue and definitely not a reason to go for ‘gas or hybrid’ in stead.
    1
  5984. Availability of lithium is not limited at all. Lithium iron phosphate batteries do not contain cobalt and nickel and work absolutely fine as proven by Tesla and several Chinese EV manufacturers.
    1
  5985. But far less efficient!
    1
  5986. There is plenty more applications for lithium.
    1
  5987. You don’t.
    1
  5988.  @TheOnlyKingBee  They last much longer
    1
  5989. Je hebt duidelijk geen flauw idee
    1
  5990. And will always remain the future.
    1
  5991.  @EdWeibe  Correct and they will always be
    1
  5992. You are confusing warranty time with expected life. Batteries last many times more than 100,000 miles. And yes, EVs do actually prevent loads of CO2 from entering the atmosphere - even in worst case scenarios.
    1
  5993. Why would you?
    1
  5994.  @arthikalexander316  Why would you make hydrogen from electricity and then make electricity from hydrogen?
    1
  5995. Tesla chargers in Nebbenes: https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwi299WVtv3jAhXO0KQKHTd9DdEQjRx6BAgBEAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.teslarati.com%2Fnorway-home-worlds-largest-tesla-supercharger-station%2F&psig=AOvVaw3h5W677hg_zxPRPhsQwggk&ust=1565702417022171
    1
  5996. Hoe kom je daar nou bij grapjas.
    1
  5997. Ever heard of CO2?
    1
  5998.  @patrickhall3878  Only a tiny fraction compared to the emissions caused by burning fossil fuels day in day out.
    1
  5999.  @patrickhall3878  What is your point? That is perfectly possible.
    1
  6000.  @patrickhall3878  Reality simply proves you wrong. Solar is contributing massively to energy production every single day all around the world. Therefore huge amounts of CO2 are prevented from entering the atmosphere and this is only the beginning. And no, natural gas is not clean. Who told you that?!
    1
  6001.  @patrickhall3878  How can you think natural gas is clean?! 😂
    1
  6002.  @patrickhall3878  Oh the good old Volcano myth. Spoiler alert: it’s not true.
    1
  6003.  @patrickhall3878  The solution is all around us: wind, solar and hydro + batteries for day to day storage. Obviously combined with fossil generation to fill the gaps. These gaps have been shrinking every year and will continue to do so. This way CO2 emissions will keep declining. It will take time but many countries are doing great already.
    1
  6004. Of course not. EVs will eventually trickle down to third worlds countries as well. Your reasoning to use eFuels makes no sense at all. eFuels are the most inefficient solution by far, requiring at least 5 times as much electric energy and would thus enormously slow down the energy transition.
    1
  6005. So what else do you propose instead of an electric camaro?
    1
  6006. You forgot that animal farming is incredibly polluting for the planet and unhealthy for people.
    1
  6007. Lol it’s not a conspiracy. It’s just physics.
    1
  6008.  @D5Do  It’s just the laws of physics…
    1
  6009.  @D5Do  haha
    1
  6010.  @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
  6011. Bronx Bronx Dat valt allemaal wel mee hoor. Er zit tegenwoordig nog maar weinig kobalt in accu’s. Ooit foto’s gezien van de vernietigende effecten van oliewinning in onder andere Afrika?
    1
  6012. Bronx Bronx Dat betekent nog niet dat het slechter is dan het alternatief.
    1
  6013. Bronx Bronx Nee juist niet. Dat zeg ik. Natuurlijk heeft het maken van lithium-ionaccu’s negatieve invloeden op de planeet (net zoals elk massageproduceerd product). De effecten en de uitstoot zijn echter VELE malen minder erg dan die van het winnen, raffineren, transporteren en verbranden van aardolieproducten.
    1
  6014. Even on carbon heavy electricity EVs are much better than diesel or petrol cars.
    1
  6015. That is exactly what EVs do...
    1
  6016.  @peterjones6507  Nope. Data is clear.
    1
  6017.  @superheriber27  Don’t eat dead animals if you are afraid of microplastics.
    1
  6018. P Bone Het gaat in de video ook helemaal niet over verbrandingsmotoren..
    1
  6019. Of course, but that is not what the video is about.
    1
  6020. A large part of farmers are not needed: meat and dairy farms.
    1
  6021. Solid state batteries are also lithium ion. Also, we don’t need solid state batteries for stationary storage. Cheaper, less energy dense chemistries like LFP are great for that.
    1
  6022.  @shutinalley  yes, that is a nice goal
    1
  6023.  @shutinalley  Yup :(
    1
  6024. It is not
    1
  6025. Even on fossil fuels EVs are cleaner. Renewables are a lot more than 10% on many countries including Germany.
    1
  6026. george ibrahim Elektrisch beter en sowieso de toekomst.
    1
  6027. Water engine 😂 also you might want to look up what whataboutism means.
    1
  6028.  @LionGaming-pk9yt  Too inefficient. Battery is the way to go.
    1
  6029. Simple: EV life cycle emissions are lower than any ICE car.
    1
  6030. Ja want als iets niet leuk is dan zal het wel woke zijn he 😂
    1
  6031. Erhmm, yes he is actually just saying that.
    1
  6032. It’s not
    1
  6033. Range is not an issue, even without swap stations.
    1
  6034. Not really. Hybrids were cool 20 years ago.
    1
  6035.  @truebrit3670  😄
    1
  6036. Doesn’t solve the efficiency problem.
    1
  6037. You don't see CO2 as a problem we need to solve as fast as possible?
    1
  6038.  @professormadlad7773  Of course.
    1
  6039. Harvs, on demand where?!
    1
  6040. 😂
    1
  6041.  @nobatteryelectricvehicles7659  Lots of people are buying EVs.
    1
  6042.  @nobatteryelectricvehicles7659  5% is a lot of people.
    1
  6043.  @nobatteryelectricvehicles7659  Buy an ICE vehicle of course. Only a few years ago this was 100 %.
    1
  6044. You are actually making the comment section a lot worse yourself.
    1
  6045. The switch to electric cars is in no way comparable to diesel.
    1
  6046. Kost je wel 2 keer zo veel.
    1
  6047. Even Toyota said a few weeks ago they are going to make a lot new electric models.
    1
  6048. Ever heard of fast charging?
    1
  6049. You can go camping with it. It makes no sense to develop a hybrid vehicle in 2024.
    1
  6050.  @davidlogan3874  Have you ever driven an EV?
    1
  6051.  @davidlogan3874  Not even close. Weight only has a small effect on range, especially when cruising on the highway.
    1
  6052.  @davidlogan3874  Pulling a trailer is incomparable to putting some people and luggage in it. The difference will be small, even in de mountains.
    1
  6053.  @davidlogan3874  Of course, that is up to you. But you are just using the wrong reasons.
    1
  6054. It is not. Air pollution is lethal.
    1
  6055. Lol so what. EV's are still a lot better.
    1
  6056. Ok wappie
    1
  6057.  @Jay_Scott_Raymond  this 😂
    1
  6058. Oh yes, also you will own an EV.
    1
  6059. Hydrogen will always remain the future.
    1
  6060. Ok wappie
    1
  6061.  @GTfour01  Hé nog een wappie
    1
  6062. sure but why would you
    1
  6063.  @deanervik  You forgot that the hydrogen has to be made from electricity first.
    1
  6064. Hé een wappie
    1
  6065.  @BenaissaBenomar-b5k Totdat alles elektrisch is. Wat denk jij dan?
    1
  6066.  @_Vv77_  Hou op met die onzin.
    1
  6067. It’s correct in British grammar, so likely to be the same in Australia.
    1
  6068. Not at all. More like 20 to 30 minutes.
    1
  6069.  @1959rossco  Vast majority of modern EVs. Tesla, Mercedes, Nio, BMW etc.
    1
  6070.  @Leo-ii8nb  Very well explained.
    1
  6071. Cost per mile will always remain about three times as expensive as an EV.
    1
  6072. En installeren tegelijkertijd meer zonnepanelen en windturbines dan waar ook ter wereld.
    1
  6073. Only in the use case described in the video. Hybrid makes no sense for OTR.
    1
  6074. It has an electric motor powered by the hydrogen fuel cell.
    1
  6075. Exporting is no problem as these vehicles will be replacing even older ones.
    1
  6076. Heb je wel een factortje drie keer zoveel zonnepanelen nodig.
    1
  6077. Nope.
    1
  6078.  @ihateactors  yes, you
    1
  6079.  @ihateactors  thanks
    1
  6080. Zelfs elektrische auto's die volledig worden opgeladen met fossiele elektriciteit zijn efficienter, en daarmee schoner, dan auto's met een verbrandingsmotor. Bovendien heb je hiermee geen lokale uitstoot. Netbeheerder Tennet heeft recentelijk berekend dat het massaal opladen van auto's geen problemen op zal opleveren. Waterstof is hopeloos inefficient en daardoor onbetaalbaar.
    1
  6081. You can also turn it around: Buy a 300 mile EV and use it as a power wall when it is parked in front of your house.
    1
  6082. It's not and you are wrong. Batteries will not be dumped but reused and then recycled. Period. The alternative of burning fuel is MUCH worse than the effects of battery production and use.
    1
  6083. actually more and more people believe this because it is true.
    1
  6084.  @erlingnesbakken9871  wrong. Total emissions are far lower than a gasoline or diesel car.
    1
  6085.  @erlingnesbakken9871  Mostly correct (except for your last sentence of course), but that doesn’t change anything. Research shows that lifecycle emissions of an EV are still lower.
    1
  6086. Biologisch vlees is niet beter. Er worden nog steeds dieren vermoord en het sloopt nog steeds te planeet.
    1
  6087. Rogier van der Meij Dat moet je ook zeker doen. Maar je moet niet verkondigen dat er opeens ‘geen probleem’ meer is als we allemaal biologisch vlees gaan zitten eten, want dat is gewoon een leugen.
    1
  6088. Niemand praat over het feit dat veel boeren met de tijd weigeren mee te gaan.
    1
  6089.  @MailliwNL  Als ze met hun tijd mee zouden gaan dan had de veehouderij al enorm gekrompen moeten zijn.
    1
  6090.  @Elliott2001  Vet goed argument
    1
  6091. Meat and dairy have many more devastating effects apart from the genetic modification problem.
    1
  6092.  @user-fx2oo3bi9c  Why choose an intrinsically inefficient system?
    1
  6093. Doesn’t change the outcome much.
    1
  6094.  @user-lz3sv5sw9u  Correct. Changes are needed in every field.
    1
  6095. Of course not. Such a truck would consume five times as much electric energy, and you are worried about the grid 😂
    1
  6096. Veehouders maken geen brood.
    1
  6097. Lol long before that we have run out of affordable diesel and gasoline.
    1
  6098. Still pretty good at about 60%
    1
  6099. We can do both at the same time.
    1
  6100. Which Asian country are you talking about?
    1
  6101. Dat beweert ook niemand. Elektrisch is gewoon veel schoner dan benzine of diesel. Daar gaat het om.
    1
  6102. robrensenkampen Jazeker wel. Al gauw de helft in CO2-uitstoot in het geval van grijze stroom.
    1
  6103. That doesn't matter. Still cleaner than burning oil in each vehicle.
    1
  6104. "we didn't try all the hybrid yet" lol. Hybrid is over man. We shouldn't be hauling around internal combustion engines and petrol tanks in our EV's anymore. It is super inefficient. And yes, a Tesla is in fact a lot cheaper to run than any petrol / diesel / hybrid car.
    1
  6105.  @yahyaalshorify9297  That price is simply wrong. It could easily be around 5 pounds per 100 miles if you charge at home or at a non rapid public charger.
    1
  6106.  @_winston_smith_ a.k.a. tiny
    1
  6107.  @ns1559  Battery recycling has been around for a long time. It probably won't really be a problem to adapt these existing technologies to EV batteries when amounts of salvage cars increase. Used batteries are full of valuable materials so they won't end up in landfills. Capturing carbon after combustion is possible, but requires a lot of energy and does not really work outside of stationary applications.
    1
  6108. Yes, partially. But that is not relevant because it is cleaner anyway.
    1
  6109. Roland Wouters blablabla allemaal onzin en nergens op gebaseerd. Verder is waterstof verre van gunstiger omdat het gigantisch inefficient is en blijft.
    1
  6110. Wrong. Electric is far superior.
    1
  6111.  @harleydavidson4254  In large parts of Europe no problem at all.
    1
  6112. Often comes down to bad preparation / knowledge about EV usage.
    1
  6113. Totdat je bij een ongeluk betrokken raakt…
    1
  6114.  @zacharyjohnson1494  Ik doelde op het juridische aspect.
    1
  6115. No.
    1
  6116.  @emitting  The point is that this will only be 1/3rd of the amount you need for the hydrogen car.
    1
  6117.  @emitting  Nope. It does not depend on that. An EV ALWAYS consumes only a third of that exact same energy. No matter how it was generated.
    1
  6118. Only a very, very tiny part.
    1
  6119. 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
  6120. Oh and fuel cells grow on trees of course...
    1
  6121. Busses and lorries are no problem on batteries. Aircraft possibly on hydrogen yes.
    1
  6122.  @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
  6123. ⁠ @mikemotorbike4283  Plastic production accounts for less than 10% of a barrel of crude.
    1
  6124. But very inefficient...
    1
  6125. @ Om een paar busjes op te laden heb je geen grote aansluiting nodig. Dat kan prima op laag vermogen. Openbare laadpalen ook genoeg. De kosten die jij noemt komen in de verste verte niet in de buurt van de uitgestelde kosten die veroorzaakt worden door het verbranden van fossiele brandstoffen.
    1
  6126.  @Dylan-mr5hs  Een paar busjes per bedrijf, dus per aansluiting, uiteraard. Tussen 9 en 5 laden? Juist niet. EV’s worden ‘s nachts geladen.
    1
  6127.  @Dylan-mr5hs  Rijkelijk overdreven. Tuurlijk moeten er regelmatig busjes laden, net zo als alle andere elektrische auto’s dat sinds jaar en dag doen. Helemaal geen probleem.
    1
  6128. @ Jij laat juist zien dat je je er nooit in verdiept hebt en dat je alleen op zoek bent naar redenen waarom er maar niets hoeft te veranderen. Het punt is juist dat niet alle voertuigen gelijktijdig zullen overstappen. Het is een stapsgewijs proces waarbij het aantal elektrische voertuigen en het aantal laadplekken constant toeneemt.
    1
  6129. Not in vehicles though.
    1
  6130.  @triforcelink  Will never be the case.
    1
  6131.  @triforcelink  That's not how reality works. And even IF we ever get abundant energy in these insane amounts, hydrogen in vehicles remains a terrible idea because of several other reasons.
    1
  6132.  @triforcelink  There is much more. 1. Transport of hydrogen is challenging because of low energy density. This will result in more refueling trucks on the road. 2. Refueling is slow and expensive to scale. 3. Explosion danger due to high pressures at stations and inside the vehicles 4. Complexity of the vehicles and the maintenance it requires. Also the limited lifespan of the high pressure system. 5. Even in case of insane energy surplus, charging an EV will always remain cheaper.
    1
  6133. You can easily road trip in this.
    1
  6134. Behalve vermindering van NOx-uitstoot, neemt CO2-uitstoot ook significant af (25%) en produceren snelwegen minder herrie. Bovendien is een lagere snelheid natuurlijk veiliger. Er kleven vele voordelen aan 100 km/h rijden.
    1
  6135.  @bjorngerlach7829  Hydrogen is mindbogglingly inefficient.
    1
  6136.  @drivexyz2297  The electric grid is everywhere.
    1
  6137.  @drivexyz2297  Yes there is enough electric generation capacity. Most charging happens overnight when other demand is low. A regular wall outlet has enough power to charge a vehicle every night for average daily use.
    1
  6138. Better get used to it
    1
  6139. Batteries will outlive the rest of the vehicle, as opposed to hydrogen fuel cells and tanks.
    1
  6140.  @Brian-om2hh  I have absolutely no clue..
    1
  6141.  @Brian-om2hh  Yeah, exactly this, or are there really such vast numbers of the people still so unbelievably misinformed?
    1
  6142.  @FlorentHenry  It’s 2025. The alternative for a Tesla is not a gas powered car. Also, Elon single handedly caused all the damage by himself, published all the bullshit on his own news outlet. No ‘MSM’ involved here.
    1
  6143. Das schalten kann doch einfach im Armatur statt finden?
    1
  6144. Electric is always cleaner, even if it is mainly produced by fossil fuels.
    1
  6145.  @BennyUKBoy  Nope, it is cleaner overall.
    1
  6146.  @BennyUKBoy  Centralized electricity production is always cleaner and more efficient than any combustion engine. This results in lower CO2 emissions.
    1
  6147.  @BennyUKBoy  Wrong. Battery emissions are quickly compensated for when you start driving.
    1
  6148.  @BennyUKBoy  inform yourself. There is plenty of research available on the matter.
    1
  6149. You are reffering to Stanley Meyer. 1. He had nothing to do with hydrogen fuel cell cars. 2. He wasn't murdered.
    1
  6150. Not relevant, driving electric is always cleaner - even if the electricity comes mainly from coal or natural gas.
    1
  6151. @Aceman dave  CO2 emissions are always higher than an EV.
    1
  6152. And insanely inefficient...
    1
  6153. Lol
    1
  6154. Lol hydrogen causes three times the amount of CO2 emissions.
    1
  6155.  @Peterblack12  You forgot about production.
    1
  6156.  @Peterblack12  The vast amounts of electricity required for that do.
    1
  6157.  @Peterblack12  Nope. Hydrogen fuel cell cars are very inefficient their entire lifetime. EVs are super efficient their entire lifetime and it only takes about 2 to 3 years to compensate for their production emissions on average grid power.
    1
  6158. Could you please elaborate on why they would not be recyclable?
    1
  6159.  @ylee3438  That is a real pity because LFP has a lot of advantages compared to other chemistries.
    1
  6160.  @ylee3438  Many EVs are doing great on LFP. The Model 3 beging one of the best examples. With proper temperature management LFP is very usable in winter too.
    1
  6161.  @ylee3438  I have no idea about China. I just know the LFP Model 3 is doing absolutely fine in both European and American winters.
    1
  6162.  @tooltalk  + longevity and lower fire hazard.
    1
  6163.  @tooltalk  That could be, interesting. However, initial degradation does not indicate bad longevity. And yes, LFP can be kept at 100% SoC. That is another advantage.
    1
  6164. Not really. Hard too scale too.
    1
  6165. Not necessary except for that price.
    1
  6166.  @sebastiaan4898  Het tegengaan van klimaatverandering.
    1
  6167.  @sebastiaan4898  Haha en jij dacht dat beleidsmakers daar niet over nadenken? Elektrische energie is geen probleem. Gemiddeld verbruikt een elektrische auto nog geen 10 kWh per dag. Dat is niks. Grondstoffen? Die zijn er zat en er zijn talloze bedrijven die hard werken aan de winning daarvan. Zonnepanelen stimuleren?! Guess what, dat gebeurt al jaren en met groot succes. In citeer: “Ondanks de coronacrisis groeide de Nederlandse zonnesector vorig jaar met maar liefst 41 procent. Volgens een trendrapport van onderzoeksbureau Dutch New Energy Research werd er voor 2,9 gigawatt aan zonnepanelen geïnstalleerd.” Openbaar vervoer gratis? Ja dat zou fantastisch zijn, maar het wordt ook al enorm gesubsidieerd en reiskosten worden belasting vrij vergoed. Betere spoorverbindingen? Wordt ook al hard aan gewerkt. Waar heb je het allemaal over? Het gebeurt allemaal al.
    1
  6168. That's what he said, homeowners.
    1
  6169.  @D.R658  He said if you are a homeowner you should have solar panels. Obviously then all homeowners contribute to renewable energy production everyone can consume.
    1
  6170. 21:10 very weak comments on the sustainability topic. Natural gas is not clean at all as it produces loads of CO2. It is not a future proof solution at all and shouldn't be presented this way.
    1
  6171.  @trowawayacc  😂
    1
  6172. Big oil’s wet dream is hydrogen..
    1
  6173.  @gTube11011  exactly this.
    1
  6174. 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
  6175. ... because IT is not RELEVANT
    1
  6176. ​ @BarbaraA.MertzRN-CCRN  IT'S NOT. you are making a mistake in your comparison. The battery should be compared to the hydrogen fuel tank and the fuel cell. The electrons in the battery should be compared to the hydrogen itself. So think about it gain and you realise why your first comment makes no sense. Don't embarrass yourself again.
    1
  6177.  @BarbaraA.MertzRN-CCRN  Lol I never said it is free. It is just the least carbon intensive way. Battery production is already below 100 kg of CO2 per kWh. Yes, that is low.
    1
  6178. Petrol prices have also risen dramatically.
    1
  6179. Solar and Wind are not free. We would literally need to build three times the amount of those things if we all drove on hydrogen. Electrolysis under pressure? You thought that there is not extra energy required for that?
    1
  6180. Het mooie is dat je elektrische voer- en vaartuigen kunt opladen op momenten dat er juist veel capaciteit op het net is.
    1
  6181. Een groot deel van de wereld is bezig met de energietransitie en andere landen zullen vanzelf volgen.
    1
  6182.  @pghagen  Je weet niet waar je het over hebt. Er zijn tig westelijke landen die al veel verder zijn dan Nederland. Het is de hoogste tijd dat we iets gaan doen.
    1
  6183. Yes they are.
    1
  6184. substituting or subsidising?
    1
  6185. Why would you? Superchargers are very fast and MUCH cheaper.
    1
  6186. Zucht.
    1
  6187. Niet leuk voor de boeren, maar uiteindelijk beter voor ons allemaal.
    1
  6188.  @joopiedelange8463  onzin.
    1
  6189.  @MyCloudz070  Veehouders die door willen gaan met hun dieronterende en milieuvervuilende bedrijven, die hebben geen empathisch vermogen.
    1
  6190.  @waxweazle100  ok klaas
    1
  6191.  @waxweazle100  Wie zegt dat er neppe boeren tussen zitten? Komt de wappies wel goed uit toch? Wel heel naïef.
    1
  6192.  @waxweazle100  Haha
    1
  6193. Hydrogen cars are much more complex and require a lot more maintenance than an EV.
    1
  6194. Aircraft are unlikely to be converted to hydrogen as hydrogen storage on board of existing airframes is practically impossible. More realistic is the option of synthetic fuels which don’t require any alterations of the aircraft.
    1
  6195.  @effingsix3825  Energy density of hydrogen storage is quite poor compared to kerosine. There simply won’t be enough space to give the aircraft a decent range.
    1
  6196.  @effingsix3825  Correct, but when you take the high pressure or cryogenic tanks in consideration the density drops a lot and they are practically impossible to integrate in existing wings.
    1
  6197.  @effingsix3825  For long haul flights cryogenic is the only option because the volumetric energy density of hydrogen is so low. These, preferably, cilindrical tanks are pretty much impossible to fit inside existing wings. This would require to use a lot of space inside the fuselage instead - reducing cargo capacity. Look up 'hydrogen-powered aircraft' on Wikipedia where a section is dedicated to this subject.
    1
  6198. lol of course not.
    1
  6199.  @sand0760 Dat gaat niet om een stroomtekort maar om een distributieprobleen.
    1
  6200. not at all
    1
  6201. Juist niet. Elektrische voertuigen branden veel minder vaak.
    1
  6202. Ok wappie
    1
  6203. Petrol and diesel are quite close to each other when it comes to efficiency. Hydrogen and batteries are clearly not.
    1
  6204.  @RR-us2kp  Using hydrogen for vehicles is a complete waste of precious energy. That is the problem.
    1
  6205.  @RR-us2kp  haha
    1
  6206. lol
    1
  6207. Everything is going to be electric.
    1
  6208. Lol ‘energiemonteur’
    1
  6209.  @iced_latteZ  Yes, definitely agree regarding metropolitan areas.
    1
  6210. You forgot something lol 😂😂
    1
  6211. Where do you get the energy from for electrolysis?
    1
  6212.  @edricrodriguez5483  I repeat my question: Where do you get the energy from for separating the hydrogen.
    1
  6213. Vermaledijd ! Ja akkerbouw ja. En waar heb ik het over buitenlandse producten? We moeten stoppen met vlees en zuivel eten. Dat is het hele idee juist.
    1
  6214. Vermaledijd ! Uiteraard is dat zo.
    1
  6215.  @carholic-sz3qv  99% of all hydrogen is made from natural gas. This causes 10 kg CO2 per kg of hydrogen.
    1
  6216. Battery production is not worse than driving a petrol car. Hydrogen will always remain expensive.
    1
  6217. Uitstekend plan
    1
  6218. Goeie keus Dries.
    1
  6219. wiet111 jij snapt t 👍🏻
    1
  6220. It’s impossible. That’s why.
    1
  6221. You have no clue. Elon is not hyping anything. He just made a decision based on basic laws of physics. If hydrogen cars made any sense, Tesla's would run on hydrogen.
    1
  6222. @TheMagicJIZZ That is not the issue.
    1
  6223. @ Correct. More European EVs is what we need.
    1
  6224. @TheMagicJIZZ Assuming number of cars sold will not change these people will find a job at another carmaker easily. Also because other car makers are less efficient and need more manual labor to build a vehicle.
    1
  6225. LOL
    1
  6226. Yup, and eventually all used cars will be electric too.
    1
  6227. Ever heard about CO2?
    1
  6228.  @ryanehlis426  lol
    1
  6229. If you want low cost hydrogen is never an option.
    1
  6230. Well it is only logical because 70% of a barrel of crude is used for gasoline and diesel.
    1
  6231.  @garycombs5721  Well if that is the result, so be it. The point is to stop burning petroleum products.
    1
  6232.  @garycombs5721  it’s just simple science
    1
  6233.  @garycombs5721  Except that it doesn’t have anything to do to the earth’s current warming.
    1
  6234.  @i.k.8868  precies.
    1
  6235. Chargers along the street are nothing new.
    1
  6236. Of course. There is loads of lifecycle research available online that cover all the details.
    1
  6237.  @MrStr8den  lol
    1
  6238. per kWh houd je ongeveer 1/3 over aan het einde van de rit.
    1
  6239.  @rockeerockey6941  It’s just simple data. Average CO2 emissions per kWh.
    1
  6240.  @rockeerockey6941  There are many problems. Of which overpopulation is one.
    1
  6241. Haha 😂
    1
  6242. Wat een onzin. Gas is totaal niet schoon. In de winter komt veel energie uit wind.
    1
  6243. @ Maar wel CO2.
    1
  6244. They are not a lie. You just don’t like reality.
    1
  6245.  @gonzalvezalvez6572  wrong, data is clear.
    1
  6246.  @gonzalvezalvez6572  Haven’t seen so much misinformation, myths, misconceptions and lies in a single comment in a very long time. I don’t even know where to start.
    1
  6247. Verwarmen met een warmtepomp op elektriciteit is veel efficienter.
    1
  6248. Yeah exactly. Hydrogen cars will always remain the future.
    1
  6249. Mike knight En de meeste mensen rijden nu misschien geen 130 maar wel 110 / 120. Langzamer rijden leidt tot minder files, dat is gewoon een feit. De winst is dus wel degelijk groot.
    1
  6250. Mike knight Een gedeelte, niet het meeste.
    1
  6251. Wereldwijde voedseltekorten worden juist veroorzaakt door grootschalige veeteelt in landen zoals Nederland.
    1
  6252. Unfortunately necessary
    1
  6253.  @ComeJesusChrist  I didn’t cite them because: 1. Comments with URLs almost always get deleted 2. They are very easy to find. Just spend a few minutes reading reports on ‘Lifecycle emissions EVs’ via Google. The reason I am not responding to your numbers is because there is so much more to the story which influences the comparison on the side of the ICE car that you are overlooking.
    1
  6254.  @ComeJesusChrist  Youtube doesn’t allow links. Just search for ‘lifecycle emissions EVs’ and you will find all the details.
    1
  6255.  @ComeJesusChrist  I can't cite anything as URLs are not allowed. Just search for 'Lifecycle analys EVs'.
    1
  6256.  @ComeJesusChrist  Like I said, the reports are very easy to find. YT doesn't allow me to post links.
    1
  6257.  @ComeJesusChrist  'The Underestimated Potential of Battery Electric Vehicles to Reduce Emissions' by Auke Hoekstra is a great start.
    1
  6258.  @ComeJesusChrist  You don’t know how to read reports?
    1
  6259.  @ComeJesusChrist  The report is in fact peer reviewed as you can see on the website of the Eindhoven University for example. Your personal experience with a certain fuel consumption is irrelevant. It is the average numbers that count. Obviously for the exact same reason you could find a Model 3 owner that claims even lower energy consumption figures. But even if the Mercedes would average 5.5 L / 100 km the EV would still win, it would only take a little longer to break even. Also, this report was only one of the many examples of research that proves EVs produce fewer life cycle emissions and to show you that there is much more to it than just the average carbon intensity number of the electricity produced.
    1
  6260. No it does not exist. It's bullshit.
    1
  6261.  @johnra-x8p  Onzin. In Nederland kun je bijna op elke hoek van de straat laden.
    1
  6262.  @johnra-x8p  aannames…
    1
  6263.  @lexpee  onmogelijk, je schrijft letterlijk onzin
    1
  6264.  @lexpee  ja dat is dus precies dat jij vergeten bent 😂
    1
  6265. Prices dropped a lot over the past 2 years.
    1
  6266. Haha
    1
  6267. Dude, you are so wrong. Driving electric is always better than diesel or petrol. No matter how the electricity is produced.
    1
  6268. If there was no renewable energy generated it would have been far more.
    1
  6269.  @kevinW826  Because used EV prices have reached price parity and are a lot cheaper to run.
    1
  6270.  @kevinW826  I understand. Very different in Europe. Hopefully things change soon over there too.
    1
  6271.  @mistermood4164 exactly
    1
  6272.  @VirtueelGamingNL  Nederland heeft nu al de hoogste laadpaaldichtheid ter wereld.
    1
  6273.  @Sierra-Whisky  Precies. Bij mij in de buurt schieten ze als paddenstoelen uit de grond.
    1
  6274. Of course hydrogen trucks have life cycle emissions too.
    1
  6275. It does!
    1
  6276. nice one hahaha
    1
  6277.  @romansenger2322  Exactly.
    1
  6278.  @erik5820  Tesla’s Superchargers are open to other EVs in many countries, including the USA.
    1
  6279. Literally nothing…
    1
  6280. You don't get it. If hydrogen would have been a bright idea, Tesla's would be running on hydrogen. But it obviously is not. That's why Tesla's use battery tech.
    1
  6281.  @buggsy5  exactly
    1
  6282.  @explosivemodesonicmauricet1597  Correct
    1
  6283. Ok bryan 😂
    1
  6284. Insanely inefficient.
    1
  6285. Still better
    1
  6286. Zucht
    1
  6287.  @eigenlijkisdatheellogisch  Gast. Ga je inlezen. Niemand zegt dat deze zaken ‘goed voor het milieu’ zijn. Geen enkele menselijke industriële activiteit is goed voor het milieu. Het hele punt is (uiteraard) dat hernieuwbare energie en algehele elektrificatie van zo’n beetje alles, vele en vele malen minder vervuilend is voor de planeet dan fossiele oplossingen dat zijn. Je uitspraken uit je eerste comment zijn dus onjuist.
    1
  6288.  @eigenlijkisdatheellogisch  Alsnog vele en vele malen minder slecht dan fossiele brandstoffen in de fik steken.
    1
  6289. A car lasts 10 years on average so it's not really worth the effort to convert.
    1
  6290. De cameraman zat naast m…
    1
  6291. Not at all because the vast majority of charging happens at home.
    1
  6292. ⁠ @ryanhasmanners9997 It’s not worth it at all. Hydrogen cars are not much lighter than EVs and have almost similar range.
    1
  6293.  @ryanhasmanners9997 Model S Long Range has equal range as the Toyota Mirai and only weighs 350 kg more.
    1
  6294.  @ryanhasmanners9997  What I am saying is te small difference in weight is not worth spending 3 times as much energy to drive the same distance.
    1
  6295.  @ryanhasmanners9997  Hydrogen has terrible volumetric energy density and therefore they are inefficient. As I showed you, production vehicle examples barely make a difference range and weight wise, while energy consumption of a hydrogen car is far higher. And no, they don't last longer either.
    1
  6296.  @ryanhasmanners9997  It's not breaking any laws of physics, it's a simple fact. You were talking about gravimetric energy density, and that is indeed quite high for hydrogen.
    1
  6297. Lol all wrong
    1
  6298. Lol nope. Electrolysis always requires at least the same amount of energy as the hydrogen is able to produce when combusted.
    1
  6299. De commentsectie is weer een klassieke wappiemagneet.
    1
  6300. Ooit van occasions gehoord?
    1
  6301. Yeah so simple, it probably doesn't require loads of energy right? ^^
    1
  6302. Even if you use 100% of fossil electricity to charge your EV it is still cleaner than any ICE.
    1
  6303. Ganz genau. Diesel ist bald vorbei.
    1
  6304. It's the other way around. All major car companies have pretty much stopped developing hydrogen cars.
    1
  6305. Infrastructure is the smallest problem. The "mind-bogglingly stupid" part is the complete lack of efficiency.
    1
  6306. you know the difference between WLTP and real life range right?
    1
  6307. Even on mainly non renewable energy driving electric causes fewer CO2 emissions.
    1
  6308. Synthetic fuel is terribly inefficient. That is the reason.
    1
  6309.  @Marcke-tb1hb  There are many steps involved in making synthetic fuels all having massive losses. This results in a well to wheel efficiency of about 20%. EVs easily do 70%. Energy and resources used for infrastructural upgrades are more than worth it.
    1
  6310.  @Marcke-tb1hb  You have no clue what you are talking about. CO2 emissions are directly correlated to efficiency. Less electricity needed = less emissions. Combustion engines on synthetic fuels will always be terrible on efficiency and therefore an insanely bad solution to lower emissions. It's just simple physics. Production emissions of EVs are compensated for within the first few years of driving. EVs easily last 10 to 15 years.
    1
  6311.  @Marcke-tb1hb  Exactly and you want to use 5 times of that exact same electricity to waste on synthetic fuel production 😂Cobalt free batteries are used in countless EVs models already.
    1
  6312.  @Marcke-tb1hb  You are switching to arguments that have nothing to do with this discussion. Of course less cars is better and buying a bicycle is better than buying a car. I will never deny that. The point is that IF someone needs a new car, the least polluting option is an EV. An EV is less polluting than the most fuel efficient combustion engine car ever. Period.
    1
  6313.  @Marcke-tb1hb  I think we agree on most things. I live in a densely populated city and cycle to work every day. I love cities that aim to remove as much car traffic as possible. However, the synthetic fuel thing just does not add up because, again, it is so terribly inefficient. Whether you like it or not, cars only last less than 15 years on average so it is not worth it at all to keep relying on this existing 'infrastructure'. And even if cars lasted forever, EVs would still be the least carbon intensive option. Yes, even if you take production emissions into the equation.
    1
  6314. For that application fully electric is much better.
    1
  6315. Even if coal generated power is used, electric cars are still less polluting.
    1
  6316. It will always remain terribly inefficient.
    1
  6317. Well said.
    1
  6318. That argument does not apply to EVs lol.
    1
  6319.  @nowhere-central2566  EVs are always cleaner than diesel or gasoline, even on non renewable energy.
    1
  6320. Sure, but very inefficient.
    1
  6321.  @superpie0000  Yeah cycling is great
    1
  6322.  @aw-2130  meh
    1
  6323. Buying a new combustion engine vehicle in 2024 😂
    1
  6324. Haha yes
    1
  6325. Zo is het. Weg met de veehouderij.
    1
  6326. WATeRStoF!!!11!!
    1
  6327. Hydrogen will never make sense for passenger cars. It's simply too inefficient and will always remain so.
    1
  6328. But fuel cells grow on trees?
    1
  6329.  @mattmatthews5414  That’s a different reason.
    1
  6330. He is.
    1
  6331. Tony Stanley exactly
    1
  6332. Rey Police Still not a word about efficiency.
    1
  6333. You don't need FCEV's to solve the storage problem. Yes, you could store renewable energy with hydrogen for seasonal buffering. But of course you do not need to distribute it all over the world to fuel cars, that would be way too inefficient. Cars will simply remain battery electric because of the simplicity and efficiency.
    1
  6334. But in the near future you won’t have a choice anymore.
    1
  6335. Nice :D
    1
  6336. droom lekker verder
    1
  6337. Exactly.
    1
  6338. Getting the energy from?!
    1
  6339. Exactly
    1
  6340.  @AY-dw4om  Lithium is not scarce. Driving on hydrogen will always remain about three times as expensive per kilometer due to its horrible efficiency. Green hydrogen is made from electricity so why not use it directly.
    1
  6341.  @AY-dw4om  1. You do not read do you? I repeat. lithium is not scarce. Lithium is made from brine lakes and extraction is not difficult nor invasive. 2. You are mixing up energy efficiency and production efficiency. Lithium batteries are a carrier of energy and yes they require some considerable amount of energy to make. But only once. After that they are super efficient. Making a hydrogen fuel cell costs less energy to make but is very inefficient to operate because making, compressing, transporting and refueling hydrogen results in only one third of the efficiency of an EV.
    1
  6342. regen.
    1
  6343.  @jackdaniels2657 The range rover was a pure diesel. Not a hybrid.
    1
  6344. Lol they are not. It is impossible to filter CO2 you know...
    1
  6345. Of course the electricity consumption is relatively high. It is a van.
    1
  6346.  @jamaicasysbm2580  Yes.
    1
  6347.  @jamaicasysbm2580  Nobody claims it has to change over night.
    1
  6348. Still not efficient
    1
  6349. A product that is more expensive but better for our planet does deserve incentives.
    1
  6350.  R F  Het gaat hier om veehouderij. De akkerbouw is niks mis mee hoor. Genoeg voedsel dus.
    1
  6351. Not really
    1
  6352. Nee hoor. EV's zijn gewoon de oplossing voor de lange termijn. Waterstof is een gepasseerd station. De accu's zelf zullen uiteraard nog veel ontwikkelingen doormaken de komende decennia, maar andere opslagmogelijkheden zullen gewoonweg nooit kunnen tippen aan het rendement van een accu.
    1
  6353. ​ @burgienl  De energie die gebruikt wordt voor het verwarmen of koelen van accu's is verwaarloosbaar en vormt absoluut niet een probleem. Het heeft geen noemenswaardige invloed op de efficiëntie van de accu - en zeker niet als je het vergelijkt met het bedroevend lage rendement van waterstof. Ook het langzaam leeglopen van een accu is in het dagelijks leven geen issue omdat het gewoon heel weinig is. Je kan makkelijk een paar maanden op vakantie en dan weer vrolijk wegrijden. Accu's zullen gewoon de standaard zijn en blijven. Uiteraard zal er nog veel aan ontwikkelingen gedaan worden, wat de laatste overgebleven nadelen op zal oplossen. De brandveiligheid is geen probleem omdat de kans simpelweg zo ontzettend laag is dat er iets serieus misgaat. Dat elektrische auto's geweerd zullen worden uit parkeergarages is echt onzin. Fossiele auto's vliegen vele malen vaker in de fik (ook in parkeergarages) en risico op heftige ontbranding is sowieso voorbij als er straks solid state-accu's bestaan.
    1
  6354. Hydrogen in a combustion engine is even less efficient than a fuel cell...
    1
  6355. Not really
    1
  6356. En nog een wappie
    1
  6357.  @devinbender8428  True haha
    1
  6358. Precies
    1
  6359. Doesn't matter. Even if you charge your EV with the dirtiest electricity you can find, it is still cleaner.
    1
  6360. Niks goeds aan. Weg met de veehouderij.
    1
  6361. Not at all. Hydrogen will never catch up. It’s just simple physics.
    1
  6362. Exactly sir. Also one should not forget that for every gallon of gasoline or diesel cobalt was used in the refining process. The oil industry is the biggest user of cobalt in the world.
    1
  6363. Sure, but eventually we just have to stop burning fossil fuels.
    1
  6364.  @RetroRoberino  of course we have to
    1
  6365.  @RetroRoberino  What are talking about. This technology should have been thrown out of the window 20 years ago.
    1
  6366.  @RetroRoberino  excellent argumentation
    1
  6367. Nee dat is het niet. Dit is namelijk nóg minder efficiënt dan waterstof.
    1
  6368.  @TheLegendOfCirce  Precies.
    1
  6369. 😂😂😂😂
    1
  6370.  @andyfeimsternfei8408  Could be, but the whole Twitter acquisition and everything around it has been very damaging to Teslas reputation.
    1
  6371. All different kinds. Why?
    1
  6372. Hé een wappie
    1
  6373. It does heat the planet. The point is that the CO2 amount in the atmosphere doubled since the industrial revolution.
    1
  6374.  @johnearthheart4614  oh come on... Where have you been? It's 2020. Hydrogen is completely over. Out of the question. Period.
    1
  6375. You have clearly no clue. Electricity transfer is fairly efficient (about 5% to 10% losses). Hydrogen in Japan is imported from Australia where it is produced from coal. And even if the hydrogen would have been created from wind mills, the losses would still be enormous.
    1
  6376.  @lyamia13  Of course we could use hydrogen to store energy, but that does not mean we should put it in cars. You could simply convert it back to electricity at the place it was made. That would be more efficient. EVs might use electricity from coal sometimes, but hydrogen cars would ALWAYS require three times more of that exact same energy, so it is a useless argument. And guess what, hydrogen cars also have batteries and a fuel cell that require recycling.
    1
  6377.  @lillypichu4566  exactly
    1
  6378. ​ @lyamia13  Could you please provide a source for these lithium availability numbers? By the way, the fact that we will eventually run out of oil is not the biggest priority for sustainable transport. GHG emissions is the number 1 reason. And in this category EVs clearly win.
    1
  6379. It's about the rate it is happening, as we all know.
    1
  6380.  @hexidev  NMC en LFP is allebei lithium-ion.
    1
  6381.  @gregorymalchuk272  duh. We are speaking in general terms here. Things that should be happening to improve the world. Through legislation everything is possible.
    1
  6382.  @johnbaxter5358  We can feed the world with plants.
    1
  6383.  @johnbaxter5358  nah it’s fine
    1
  6384. That not true most of the time. What do you propose instead?
    1
  6385. BEV yes, hydrogen no. Hydrogen makes no sense anymore in 2020 and definitely not in the future.
    1
  6386. eichler721 Lithium is far from rare.
    1
  6387.  @eichler721  Fuel cells don't grow on trees either, they require platinum for example. Fuel cell cars also have smaller lithium ion batteries and fuel cell cars use that exact same electric motors. But fuel cell cars consume three times the amount of electricity so you need the resources to build three times the amount of windmills, solar panels and power stations.
    1
  6388.  @eichler721  That sounds very plausible. Hydrogen fueling is something completely different than pumping gasoline in your tank. I have never heard of gas stations that are already prepared for hydrogen. Please provide a source.
    1
  6389.  @eichler721  It is so common for hydrogen people to come up with some future energy technology like fusion to make up for the horribly high energy consumption that fuel cell cars have. The discussion is not about the source of energy, but about the medium of storage. Even if fusion becomes reality you still need three times of it to power all the vehicles of the world. Throwing away energy is not something we can afford. Not now, not in the future.
    1
  6390.  @eichler721  Also, batteries in fuel cell cars cycle a lot more and thus have a much shorter lifespan. Also, 100 kWh is very big for an EV battery. Most cars are at about half the capacity. Again, lithium is not the problem.
    1
  6391. eichler721 Nobody cares about fast refilling if you have an enormous range and access to a super charger network. Super charging only takes 20 minutes on average and you need a break anyway after hours of driving.
    1
  6392. eichler721 Also, Toyota gives away that fuel credit as a last resort to improve sales of these idiotic cars nobody is interested in anymore.
    1
  6393. eichler721 The fact that several brands offer free fuel proves that there is low demand. Many people understand that hydrogen fuel cell tech is inferior to battery electric now. All forms of road transportation will be dominated by battery electric simply by the fact that BEVs are super efficient by nature and FCEVs are not. It is just simple physics.
    1
  6394.  @eichler721  BEVs do fine for towing as they can supply loads of torque. Of course range becomes an issue with most of current cars, but that is just a matter of battery improvement. Battery electric pick-up trucks and semi trucks (Tesla, Ford, Rivian, BYD and others) will be there in two years, long before hydrogen ever gets a chance to develop.
    1
  6395. CO2 emissions of a hybrid will always be far higher than an EV. It doesn't make sense anymore.
    1
  6396. Ja. Elektrisch is desondanks een grote vooruitgang.
    1
  6397. Maybe, but using it in cars would be an utter waste.
    1
  6398.  @rockymountainman7  Dat een bepaalde sector groeit betekent nog niet dat het bestaansrecht heeft.
    1
  6399.  @Engineer9736  Het eten van dierlijke producten past niet in de 21e eeuw omdat het maken ervan een intrinsiek inefficient en dieronterend proces is.
    1
  6400.  @rockymountainman7  Onzin. Natuurlijk zullen er af en toe wat reststromen naar de veehouderij gaan, maar bovenal worden er juist enorme oppervlaktes aan akkerbouwland gespendeerd aan het telen van gigantische hoeveelheden veevoer.
    1
  6401. rockymountainman7 Je herhaalt alleen maar wat je al eerder zei. Het gaat erom dat er voornamelijk grote hoeveelheden veevoer op de wereld verbouwd worden waar uiteindelijk een kleinere hoeveelheid vlees en zuivel van gemaakt wordt. Daarom is het inefficient.
    1
  6402.  @rockymountainman7  Nogmaals, ook al gaan er zo nu en dan wat reststromen naar de veehouderij, dan nog is dit uiteraard geen reden om dan maar een industrie in stand te houden die extreem vervuilend is en tientallen miljoenen dieren mishandelt en vermoordt.
    1
  6403.  @rockymountainman7  Het feit dat er hier en daar wat wordt hergebruikt in de veehouderij maakt nog niet de enorme nadelen die eraan kleven en de miljoenen dierenlevens die er mee gemoeid gaan goed. De wereld gaat er aan ten onder als we ons op deze manier blijven voeden. Veeteelt is extreem vervuilend en belastend voor onze planeet. Het is juist geen plan B en het past totaal niet in de 21e eeuw.
    1
  6404. Because it is inefficient, complex and expensive.
    1
  6405. Batteries are a perfect way to depend less on the grid.
    1
  6406. dude inform yourself
    1
  6407. Very inefficient.
    1
  6408. The ProMaster has been based on the Fiat Ducato for a decade…
    1
  6409. Production of hydrogen from that water is the problem, not the water itself. And just because you can run a little engine on hydrogen proves nothing.
    1
  6410.  @EdwardHood  This video is about hydrogen fuel cell cars. Not combustion engines. We know they technically work, but that doesn’t solve anything about all the downsides of hydrogen vehicles.
    1
  6411.  @EdwardHood  Lol you forgot about the incredibly low efficiency to begin with. Big oil loves hydrogen by the way.
    1
  6412. Rare conclusie 😮
    1
  6413.  @gertpittsfort  Een EV heeft praktisch nooit een nieuwe accu nodig.
    1
  6414. 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
  6415. En dan nemen de ondernemers die wél kunnen rekenen het werk lekker over.
    1
  6416. Nope. Stanley Meyer is not the father of the hydrogen car. He was a scammer that tried to let people believe that a gasoline car could produce it's own HHO on board to get better mileage. This obviously did not work because a certain system would clearly be conflicting with the first and second law of thermodynamics.
    1
  6417. Het is niet relevant hoe je het noemt. Feit is dat het verbranden van koolwaterstoffen uit de lange koolstofkringloop het klimaat beïnvloedt en dat we daar dus zo snel mogelijk mee moeten kappen.
    1
  6418. So why do you think natural gas is great?
    1
  6419.  @helenodetroyo7035  So could you show me what a natural gas fuel cell chemical equation looks like?
    1
  6420. We kunnen prima zonder vlees en zuivel.
    1
  6421.  @dylan_krishna_777  Hoofdzakelijk veeteelt aangezien dat de grootste veroorzaker van stikstof is.
    1
  6422. You need transmission capacity for that…
    1
  6423. Als een bepaald product een positieve impact heeft op de wereld waar we allemaal profijt van hebben is een versnelde adoptie door middel van subsidies meer dan gerechtvaardigd.
    1
  6424.  @milanmarinkovic3016  Helaas allemaal grote onzin. Zoals ruimschoots bekend en wetenschappelijk aangetoond anno 2024 zijn elektrische auto's over hun gehele levensduur vele malen minder belastend voor het milieu. Elektrische auto's zijn juist simpele, lichte auto's met een lange levensduur. Als je een acceptabele actieradius bij een snelheid van rond de 100 km/h wil creëren kom je automatisch uit bij de efficiëntere modellen die je veel ziet zoals de Tesla Model 3. Lichter wordt het gewoon niet als je wil blijven voldoen aan de huidige veiligheids- en comforteisen. Je creëert drogredenen waarom we nu nog niet 'ver genoeg' zouden zijn om af te stappen van het verbranden van benzine en diesel en je zelf lekker niets hoeft te veranderen. Het tegendeel is waar.
    1
  6425.  @Carlos-nx5ui onzin
    1
  6426.  @firstlast-h1j en terecht. Jij denkt dat we vrolijk door moeten gaan met het verbranden van benzine en diesel?
    1
  6427. Fuel cells require far more energy.
    1
  6428.  @NisseOhlsen  There are no signs of such break-through invention at all.
    1
  6429. Hydrogen fuel cell cars also require lithium and cobalt. The problem is that they will always consume many times more of that exact same electricity (from whatever source). Improvements are possible of course, but the efficiency will always remain very low compared to an BEV.
    1
  6430. Guess what, we can also produce electricity locally to charge batteries requiring only a third of the energy. And Euro emissions norms have nothing to do with CO2, so your comparison makes no sense at all.
    1
  6431. Still pretty bad. Natural gas causes almost just as much CO2 as gasoline.
    1
  6432.  @douglasrodrigues8361  Or excavator?
    1
  6433.  @CocoaPuffss  Jij begrijpt het tenminste.
    1
  6434.  @aheroyaheroyalproductions7631  Het gaat niet om boeren in het algemeen, maar om veehouders.
    1
  6435.  @aheroyaheroyalproductions7631  Nope.
    1
  6436.  @aheroyaheroyalproductions7631  Vlees is sowieso voorbij.
    1
  6437.  @aheroyaheroyalproductions7631  Zoals ik net al zei: vanwege de gigantische milieubelasting en grootschalige schending van dierenrechten.
    1
  6438.  @aheroyaheroyalproductions7631  Haha wen er maar aan.
    1
  6439.  @aheroyaheroyalproductions7631  Ik begrijp dat de realiteit soms confronterend is, maar het besef zal vast ook bij jou een keer doordringen. Vlees en zuivel horen niet in de 21e eeuw thuis.
    1
  6440.  @showcaseSampa  Barely. It’s not a solution.
    1
  6441. @ Of course they work fine, but that is not the point. We are talking about efficiency and emissions. That is the problem and a matter of fact. It has nothing to do with opinions.
    1
  6442. Except that electric cars are far more efficient and therefore require far less energy. An EV only needs about 10 kWh per day.
    1
  6443.  @maxthemagition  Wrong. Power stations are far more efficient than combustion engines.
    1
  6444.  @maxthemagition  I know the carnot cycle and that is exactly why power stations are so efficient. Fuel production is simply so inefficient and polluting that EVs using non renewable energy is still cleaner. Production emissions of the EV are compensated for within the first few years of driving.
    1
  6445.  @maxthemagition  That's not how it works. You can easily look up the average consumption of electric vehicles. Many of them will be somewhere around 0,2 kWh per kilometer. A comparable petrol car will use about 0,066 liter per kilometer, which equals 0,6 kWh.
    1
  6446.  @maxthemagition  Yes it is. Look it up. This is why EVs make so much sense.
    1
  6447.  @maxthemagition  That is ALMOST what I said. And any car consumes more in these different conditions, this has nothing to do with the type of drivetrain.
    1
  6448.  @MisterCOM  Nee dat hebben ze niet grapjas.
    1
  6449.  @RayHolland494  Het misbruiken, verkrachten en vermoorden van dieren moet inderdaad zo snel mogelijk verboden worden. Welkom in de 21e eeuw.
    1
  6450.  @kootje4700  Uhhh waarom zou ik dat ergens vandaan willen halen?
    1
  6451.  @zzzz-rv7hs  Haha was het maar zo'n feest.
    1
  6452.  @MisterCOM  Nee man. Hoe kom je daar nou bij.
    1
  6453.  @MisterCOM  B12 kunnen we heel efficiënt uit algen produceren en door middel van tabletten innemen. Zonder dierenleed.
    1
  6454.  @SensitivityGames  We hebben geen slagtanden mafkees. En we zijn inderdaad geen carnivoren, daarom hoef je ook geen vlees te eten. Handig he :)
    1
  6455.  @MisterCOM  Je houdt jezelf voor de gek. B12 = B12. De dieren zullen je dankbaar zijn.
    1
  6456. kootje NL Fout. Bekend misverstand.
    1
  6457. kootje NL We zijn omnivoren dus we kunnen zowel op planten als vlees leven. Zonder vlees kan dus ook.
    1
  6458. Lars Voorderhaak Gadverdamme man.
    1
  6459. kootje NL Dat is een bekend misverstand. Het gaat erom dat je een bepaalde variatie aan aminozuren binnenkrijgt. Dit kun je probleemloos doen door regelmatig peulvruchten, granen en noten te eten.
    1
  6460. kootje NL Kom maar met een bron.
    1
  6461. kootje NL Sinds wanneer staan dit soort dingen in een wet?
    1
  6462.  @sikkogameaholic6667  Het eten van dierlijke producten loopt gewoon op z'n eind. Of je het nou wil of niet. De productiemethoden hebben enorme gevolgen voor het milieu, de dieren en het klimaat. Onze planeet kan het simpelweg niet aan om de wereldbevolking te voeden met dierlijk voedsel. Dus laten we de veestapel eerst maar eens halveren. Dat sommige mensen daardoor hun baan verliezen is jammer maar natuurlijk veel minder belangrijk. Het gaat om de toekomst van ons allemaal. De overheid dient boeren die willen stoppen financieel te steunen. Niks mis mee toch?
    1
  6463.  @kootje4700  Als je onzin de wereld in slingert kun je op z'n minst laten zien hoe je aan die gekkigheid komt.
    1
  6464.  @sikkogameaholic6667  Ik spreek nergens van een meerderheid. Gelukkig gaat het wel de goede kant op! Blijkbaar besef jij niet hoe ontzettend veel land je nodig hebt om een stukje vlees of een pak melk te produceren. En dat is niet het enige probleem. De productie van vlees en zuivel is inherent verbonden met grootschalige milieuvervuiling, grondwatervergiftiging, ontbossing, uitstoot van methaan en mishandeling van miljarden dieren. Dit kan gewoon niet zo door gaan en zeker niet als we over een tijdje met 10 miljard zijn.
    1
  6465.  @kootje4700  Er is niks extremistisch aan het verkondigen van de waarheid.
    1
  6466.  @kootje4700  De boeren produceren juist voornamelijk voor die 'andere culturen' en multinationals en profiteren daar enorm van.
    1
  6467. And that is exactly what battery technology allows us to do.
    1
  6468.  @forgetyourlife  so what do you propose?
    1
  6469.  @forgetyourlife  Of course. Nobody says that battery technology will fix everything. It will play a vital role however.
    1
  6470.  @garreysellars5525  The result is still funny
    1
  6471. Per dag*
    1
  6472. Where do you see that?
    1
  6473. Nope, it is the other way around. Hydrogen is not the future despite the fact that oil companies would love this.
    1
  6474. Lol you are so misinformed.
    1
  6475. Not really. Practically no manufacturer is focusing on hydrogen.
    1
  6476. Not in the long run.
    1
  6477.  @adamdavies1249  Will always remain terribly inefficient.
    1
  6478. Any idea what the track is?
    1
  6479. Of course it can replace diesel. Electric motors are far more capable than any diesel engine and battery technology is advancing fast. A few years ago we couldn’t imagine an electric truck with 500 km range, and now we already have the e-Actros and the Tesla Semi.
    1
  6480. Er dient vooral natuur terug te keren. Een klein gedeelte van het vrijgekomen land inzetten voor huizenbouw is inderdaad ook een goed idee.
    1
  6481.  @hansvanrijswijk409  Wordt al veel gedaan maar heeft natuurlijk onvoldoende effect tenzij je extreme hoogbouw gaat toepassen.
    1
  6482.  @hansvanrijswijk409  Tuurlijk. Maar het gaat om een combinatie van maatregelen.
    1
  6483. Not relevant
    1
  6484.  @texasray5237  Wrong. Electricity is always a mix of sources. Even if you charge your car with mainly coal generated electricity it still is MUCH cleaner. Nuclear is a whole other discussion.
    1
  6485. Wrong choice of vehicle
    1
  6486. Stoer man
    1
  6487. Waarom denk je dat Joost.
    1
  6488.  @joostmagtweten8558  Grotendeels broodje aap-verhaal aangaande dat 'giftige gas'. Enkele honderden kilo's ervan komen inderdaad vrij per jaar in Nederland. Hexafluoride is een broeikasgas, maar omdat het slechts in zo'n minuscule hoeveelheid vrijkomt weegt het natuurlijk in de verste verte niet op tegen de enorme CO2-besparingen van windenergie. Dit geld ook voor de andere 'problemen' die je noemt.
    1
  6489.  @Scalbow95  Fuel cell vehicles are far more complex than EVs. I don’t think they are more reliable.
    1
  6490. Several different sources, as with any electrical device.
    1
  6491. Not really.
    1
  6492. Used to be free in the beginning, not anymore. Prices vary per country. Often around 0,25 Euro per kWh. So if you have a 75 kWh battery it will cost you less than 20 Euro for a full charge.
    1
  6493. Not at all. Most people will benefit from these governmental plan.
    1
  6494. Wat een onzin
    1
  6495.  @GBDam-dj1nz  Dat kolencentrales worden aangeslingerd, dat kencentrales de schoonste vorm van energie zijn, en dat ‘bakblikken’ elk jaar vervangen moeten worden.
    1
  6496. Nope.
    1
  6497.  @GavinLawrence747  It is surprising that you are hoping that problems can be solved by technological advancements in the future (which I fully agree to), but you at the same time you don’t want this to happen to the food you eat?
    1
  6498. Doubledeepfried Je kan ook gewoon je elektrische auto en een Powerwall ermee opladen, dan heb je sowieso genoeg en hoef je niet te hopen.
    1
  6499. Barely time saving..
    1
  6500. IF hydrogen is going to be big, it is going to be the oil industry that is going to produce, store, transport and sell it.
    1
  6501. Zijn ze ook.
    1
  6502. ​ @jeroenbytheway9740  Natuurlijk wel, maar wat doet jou vermoeden dat dit meer CO2 is dan een brandstofmotor gedurende de levensduur van de auto zou uitstoten?
    1
  6503. En jij denkt dat Tata voor de lol staal produceert? Industrie bestaat om producten te produceren die consumenten gebruiken.
    1
  6504. That would mean they can get electricity at an extremely low price which could have been used to power 5 times more vehicles if used in EVs.
    1
  6505.  @ankur313  You could have thought so 10+ years ago. Not in 2023.
    1
  6506.  @ankur313  It is correct. There is a lot of information available on both subjects. Good luck.
    1
  6507.  @barrybritcher  SAME IN THE NETHERLANDS
    1
  6508. Lol. If fuel cells were a great idea, Teslas would have them from day 1.
    1
  6509. Lol
    1
  6510. Hydrogen is hideously inefficient.
    1
  6511. Why do you think EV passenger cars are not good enough?
    1
  6512.  @maxmagnus777  Because it was fake news. Lithium mining is not very invasive. Lithium is found in brine lakes and is extracted by evaporation.
    1
  6513.  @novarem9828  So why do you think industrial plants exist?
    1
  6514. Ja natuurlijk. Wat stel jij dan voor? Als onze complete leefomgeving naar de klote is hebben we vrij weinig aan banen.
    1
  6515. So what?
    1
  6516. Erik Johnson That is a common misconception. Electric cars are always the least polluting option - even if you use electricity produced from coal. Catalytic converters do not filter CO2.
    1
  6517.  @Erewhon2024  The comparison you describe has been demonstrated and calculated many times. It's no rocket science. The losses in petroleum product production, refinery, transport en combustion are very high. This results in 3.1 kg of CO2 per liter of gasoline or 3.3 kg of CO2 per liter of diesel: https://innovationorigins.com/producing-gasoline-and-diesel-emits-more-co2-than-we-thought/ Really coal heavy electricity production causes in extreme conditions about 1 kg of CO2 per kWh. Losses in distribution and charging are about 25%. You can drive 5 kilometers on 1 kWh, so this results in 250 grams of CO2 per kilometer (in this extreme example). An average gasoline family car does about 12 km per liter, so this results in 258 grams of CO2 per km. So that is exactly the same. But don't forget, the average emissions per kWh is what counts and this is much lower. In the USA this is in the region of 500 g/kWh, as well as many countries in Europe and most countries are at an even lower level. At 500 g/kWh the difference between an EV and a gasoline car is 150 grams per kilometer. This way battery production is compensated for rather quickly. Battery production is currently at about 100 kg of CO2 per kWh (Tesla is at 77 kg of CO2). So to conclude, a battery electric vehicle with a relatively small battery is the best option.
    1
  6518. Lol
    1
  6519. Simple: Elon can’t keep his mouth shut.
    1
  6520.  @kallekas8551  Well at least he proved to have a very shitty side.
    1
  6521. You would only need 1/3 of that amount of solar panels to charge a BEV..
    1
  6522.  @pfalweer9579  Prima
    1
  6523.  @yousuck7933  Akkerbouw vormt een veel kleiner probleem. Veeteelt is een ontzettend inefficiënte manier om voedsel te produceren. Er is immers enorm veel plantaardig materiaal nodig om een kleine hoeveelheid dierlijk voedsel te produceren. Dat brengt ons dus ook gelijk weer bij akkerbouw: als er veeteelt verdwijnt, verdwijnt er direct ook akkerbouw omdat er minder veevoer nodig is. Win-win dus. En nogmaals: juist door vlees en zuivel duurder te maken zullen plantaardige alternatieven aantrekkelijker worden voor consumenten (dit gebeurt nu al langzaam) waardoor de vraag ook minder wordt. Stikstof gaat om een lokaal probleem dat specifiek hier in Nederland ernstige vormen heeft aangenomen, het gaat dus juist niet om het internationale effect. De economische gevolgen kunnen mij geen reet schelen. Een industrie die zo slecht is voor mens, dier en de natuur verdient het niet om bespaard te blijven. Alle betrokkenen weten dit al jaren en hebben dus alle kans gehad zich aan te passen (te stoppen of iets anders te gaan doen). Nu krijgen ze een laatste kans door zich met een flinke zak geld uit te laten kopen.
    1
  6524.  @yousuck7933  Haha er valt niks aan te geloven grapjas. Het zijn gewoon feiten die ook weldenkende vleeseters niet zullen ontkennen. Als je vlees eet omdat je het lekker vindt moet je het vooral doen, maar denken dat het goed zou zijn voor de natuur is gewoon een regelrechte leugen.
    1
  6525.  @ezicarus8216  :D
    1
  6526. Because they require insane amounts of energy.
    1
  6527.  @yeah_okido Goed bezig, beetje jammer van je laatste zin.
    1
  6528. Petrol cars also always give less than the offered range.
    1
  6529. Exactly
    1
  6530. Exactly sir, this is what most people tend to forget. (by the way energy = kWh)
    1
  6531.  @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
  6532. 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
  6533. 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
  6534. 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
  6535. Always the same with German media when it comes to EV related subjects.
    1
  6536. It's not really an issue as it charges quite fast.
    1
  6537. There is no lie. The problem is lack of transmissions capacity.
    1
  6538. Exactly.
    1
  6539. "60%coal, 20% nuclear and only 20% renewable" You realize that is actually pretty good already? It results in much lower emissions than any diesel of gasoline car is ever capable of. Scaling up vegetable oil usage in vehicles will inevitably result in food vs fuel conflicts. Closed carbon cycle fuels are very inefficient and require MUCH more electricity than EVs would.
    1
  6540.  @nobodysbusiness87  I am sorry, but that is wrong. An electric car is always more efficient than using synthetic fuel, despite the losses in generation and distribution. The losses in production, distribution and combustion of synthetic fuels are MUCH larger. Here is a nice chart: https://images.app.goo.gl/t2sfVgRrrqVmp7ya9 And the diesel generator Tesla charger is a nice anecdote, but obviously not an average situation.
    1
  6541.  @nobodysbusiness87  EVs simply charge directly from the grid, so emissions depend on the location. Here is the most extensive and recent study on EV battery production: https://www.ivl.se/download/18.34244ba71728fcb3f3faf9/1591706083170/C444.pdf Here is a nice video on battery recycling: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6w78-aSTIDY&lc=UgwhxAHlY9d1C6Nnw1B4AaABAg.9NlRCKxnzUF9NlVjyHfOOt Solar panel production is a different subject and in my opinion not relevant now. You can use any source of electricity you like to charge EVs, nuclear included. Let me know if you need more information.
    1
  6542. Batteries will not need replacement and you do not need a home charging station.
    1
  6543. Both hydrogen and batteries start with electricity. So you can leave efficiency of electricity out.
    1
  6544. Aditya P Battery electric is always cleaner than an internal combustion engine.
    1
  6545. Aditya P Still better than oil extraction, transport, refining and combustion. 1 liter of diesel causes about 3,3 kg of CO2 (production and combustion). Even in coal heavy countries like Poland electric driving is cleaner than anything.
    1
  6546. Aditya P Thanks for helping me out. Lets take peat emissions: 380 grams per kWh, divided by 5 = 76 grams per km. With losses in distribution and charging of 20% makes roughly 90 grams per kilometer. Diesel: 3300 grams divided by 15 makes a whopping 220 gram per km.
    1
  6547.  @adityap138  ​Alright then: 380*1,34*1,20 = 611 grams per kWh. Dividend by 5 kilometers = 122 gram per kilometer in the worst case, carbon heavy, situation. Diesel remains 220 gram per kilometer.
    1
  6548. Aditya P No: 1000 * 1,2 = 1200. So that makes 240 grams of CO2 per km in a very extreme scenario. A big thirsty V8 probably only does 10 km per liter. So: 3300 / 10 = 330 grams per km in EVERY scenario for the rest of the car’s life.
    1
  6549. Aditya P It’s not. As mentioned before, battery production emissions get compensated after a while. 1000 grams per kWh is EXTREMELY high and actually rarely occurs anywhere around the world, except for India and a few others. Here in the Netherlands (where only a few percent of the electricity is renewable) emissions are 450 grams per kWh (a combination of natural gas and coal, and bit of renewables). USA: also 450 grams, Germany: 560 grams, China: 860 grams. See? This makes driving electric always cleaner. Source: http://shrinkthatfootprint.com/electricity-emissions-around-the-world
    1
  6550. Aditya P CO2 per kWh is what counts. And even 600 grams is still fine and decreases every year. Renewables will indeed grow slowly, but even without that driving electric remains the least polluting solution.
    1
  6551. Not really
    1
  6552.  @davidavandebogart7131  And the energy needed for that on board hydrogen generator comes from?
    1
  6553. Omdat het drie keer zo efficient is.
    1
  6554. Please elaborate on hydrogen powerplants.
    1
  6555.  @alanwatts8239  So where does the energy come from to make that hydrogen in the first place?
    1
  6556. ​ @alanwatts8239  Do you have a source for that? Improving hydrogen production efficiency is probably possible, but net energy gain sounds very suspicious.
    1
  6557. Is het geen bedtijd voor jou?
    1
  6558. It is clear that you are the one who is ignoring physics.
    1
  6559. CO2 emissions are still lower than diesel.
    1
  6560. Batteries do not require replacement.
    1
  6561. It's not because current batteries last longer than the vehicle itself. Hydrogen cars do not have combustion engines by the way and require a lot more maintenance and replacements.
    1
  6562. Patrick 🤣
    1
  6563. You are mixing things up in the comparison. Lithium should be compared to the hydrogen tank and electrons should be compared to the hydrogen.
    1
  6564. Well it is less efficient than most other solutions.
    1
  6565. So tell me what you want to make these electrolysers, fuel cells an A LOT of wind turbines and solar panels from.
    1
  6566.  @dehypnotizerz  ?
    1
  6567. And lots of CO2 during the production of hydrogen lol
    1
  6568. So you think that fuel cells and electrolysers grow on trees?
    1
  6569.  @selske23  Both batteries and fuel cells can be recycled. Fuel cells don't require lithium, but metals like platinum instead. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with lithium specifically. Yes you can run a combustion engine on hydrogen, but this comes with even worse efficiency compared to fuel cells.
    1
  6570.  @freedom8480  exactly 😬
    1
  6571. CO2 gaat over klimaat, niet mileu. Alle andere stoffen die uitgestoten worden hebben invloed op het milieu in de directe omgeving. Zowel elektrische auto’s als duurzame industrie zijn belangrijk voor het behalen van de klimaatdoelen.
    1
  6572.  @argh100100  Een elektrische auto stoot al gauw maar de helft aan CO2 uit per kilometer op de Nederlandse (voornamelijk grijze) energiemix. De productieuitstoot is hiermee na een jaar of 3 gecompenseerd. Nu elektrisch rijden stimuleren heeft dus al snel een groot effect.
    1
  6573. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it must be a conspiracy. Inform yourself.
    1
  6574. Guess what, hydrogen vehicles also require minerals. By the way, minerals are far from rare.
    1
  6575. Yes you will.
    1
  6576. Er is geen sprake van straling.
    1
  6577.  @bastiaanstapelberg9018  Nope.
    1
  6578.  @disruptivegarage  Precies. Dat iedereen in de nabije toekomst elektrisch zal rijden staat inderdaad als een paal boven water. Overigens, condensatoren zijn leuk voor het leveren van veel vermogen, maar kunnen relatief weinig energie opslaan.
    1
  6579.  @disruptivegarage  Tja, misschien wel, misschien niet. Het is maar zeer de vraag of de prijs van een treinkaartje de hoofdreden is dat forenzen al dan niet voor de auto kiezen. Woon-werkverkeer wordt tevens praktisch altijd door de werkgever betaald. Een treinkaartje bestaat overigens al voor tientallen procenten uit subsidie, je kunt je afvragen hoeveel er dan nog bij moet. Als je doelt op internationale treinreizen heb je zeker een punt, al wordt het grote verschil in kosten met een vliegticket vooral veroorzaakt door het systematische gebrek aan belasting bij het laatst genoemde geval.
    1
  6580. Decennia
    1
  6581. Na 19:00 is er veel minder verkeer op de weg, dus ja, het is beter voor het milieu.
    1
  6582. Die hebben nooit bestaan.
    1
  6583.  @AdamRoyalski  natuurkundig gezien onmogelijk
    1
  6584. How to tell you know nothing about EVs by telling you know nothing about EVs.
    1
  6585.  @SheepofTheShepherd-nu3lz  KH?
    1
  6586.  @SheepofTheShepherd-nu3lz  ehm no.
    1
  6587. 😂
    1
  6588. Nee dat had niet beter geweest. Rijden op waterstof is zo bedroevend inefficiënt dat we drie keer zoveel elektriciteit nodig zouden hebben. De olie-industrie probeert juist nog op waterstof aan te sturen omdat dit iets is waar ze goed in zijn (gassen produceren, vervoeren en verkopen). Het is echter een allang en breed gepasseerd station.
    1
  6589. Niets is perfect. Het gaat er om dat het veel minder vervuilend is.
    1
  6590. Total WTW efficiency is 70% vs 20%.
    1
  6591. exactly.
    1
  6592. voornaam achternaam Tuurlijk mag en kan dat wel. Hoezo denk je van niet?
    1
  6593. You are correct.
    1
  6594.  @thebrowns5337  Explain where platinum (and also lithium) comes from for all these hydrogen cars...
    1
  6595. Doesn't matter. Driving electric is always cleaner, also if this means an increase in the use of coal.
    1
  6596. Not at all. Pretty much all vehicles will be battery powered eventually.
    1
  6597. Hydrogen has a pretty high energy densitty by weight, but a very low density by volume. And that is exactly the problem and what partly causes the low efficiency (lots of energy required for compression). Hydrogen cars require lithium, cobalt, nickel and platinum. Exact same issues.
    1
  6598. Well said. This is a useless video without sources.
    1
  6599. Guess what, hydrogen fuel cell cars also require rare earth materials.
    1
  6600. silence
    1
  6601. Electric cars are FAR better for because they are so efficient. Even on non renewable electricity they are cleaner than any diesel or gas car. Gas cars can never be clean because you cannot filter CO2.
    1
  6602. Hydrogen isn't mined
    1
  6603.  @TrevelyanOO6  Still makes absolutely no sense for countries like Japan to opt for hydrogen.
    1
  6604. Lol so tell me, what do you propose instead?
    1
  6605. It’s not really relevant. EVs are still better and the grid will get greener every years.
    1
  6606. The price will always remain much higher than electricity due to the horribly low efficiency.
    1
  6607.  @NoiserToo  Not the case in Europe. Plenty of reliable charge network operators to chose from here.
    1
  6608. Electricity demand will be higher as more EVs hit the road which will be charging during the night. Hydrogen production is a waste of renewable energy.
    1
  6609. To get an idea: 1 liter of gasoline produces about 3 kilograms of CO2. So when your gasoline tank is empty, you would have 150 to 200 kg of CO2 stored in your car somewhere. And unload it somewhere. Not to mention the CO2 separation device itself and the energy required.
    1
  6610. This video is not about ICE’s.
    1
  6611. Stop met melk drinken.
    1
  6612. They don’t
    1
  6613. Natuurlijk kun je dat wel laten verdwijnen. Vliegtuigen zullen inderdaad nog een tijdje door moeten op fossiele brandstof maar dat heeft toch niks met auto's te maken?
    1
  6614. Informeer je eens voordat je wat roept.
    1
  6615. pvdneste Het is in ieders belang dat dit soort misinformatie niet door anderen voor waar wordt aangenomen.
    1
  6616.  @Orbital_Inclination  Correct, but an electrolyzer is 80% efficient, compression also about 80% and the fuel cell is only 50% efficient.
    1
  6617. The video is correct.
    1
  6618. Zoo Juice Bullshit. You can charge at any regular socket all around the world. Also: Superchargers are in MANY countries around the world and apart from that you can use any other fast charger as well.
    1
  6619. + transmission capacity
    1
  6620. Not relevant in this comparison.
    1
  6621. Dat kan niet.
    1
  6622. There is not much to master. It will always be inherently inefficient.
    1
  6623. Chinese EVs have been on European roads for many years and they are doing fine.
    1
  6624.  @Neojhun  Exactly lol
    1
  6625.  @anonsenitl  ‚Kohlenstrom‘ ehh wass?!
    1