Comments by "Engineering the weird guy" (@engineeringtheweirdguy2103) on "Donut" channel.

  1.  @devries9528  what about it. Doesn’t change the fundamental drawbacks or hydrogen or the fundamental advantages of EV’s
    2
  2. Why can’t they be unique? Because they don’t make a vroom vroom sound? Like any other cars, torque characteristics, motor and drivetrain design, weight balance, centre of gravity and suspension, the feel and control around corners and in the straights, will all be vastly different from car to car. Hell if you’ve drive a model 3 then jumped into a model X you’d know this already. And it’s one thing to like sound but when your going for performance, electrics starting to become the go to.
    2
  3. In physics there is an upper limit to the efficiency of anything. If you heat up a cup of coffee, you will never get 100% of the energy used back. No matter what you do. Hydrogen is made using grid energy. You are effectively storing eletricity as hydrogen. No matter what you do, to convert it back to electricity from hydrogen you will never ever get the same energy you used to begin with. So if you started with 100kwh of electricity, you will never ever be able to get 100kwh of electricity back when you convert the hydrogen back to electricity. Where you could have given that 100kWh directly to a battery electric car. It will always be inefficient. That means it will always cost more per km. If you need 3x the same grid energy per mile for a hydrogen compared to a battery vehicle, you will always be AT LEAST 3 times more expensive per km. Hydrogen fuel cells also don't output alot of power, making them very slow. That will always be the case, as the physical limitation is the surface area of the catalyst. No catalyst, no reaction. Battery electrics rely on the power output of the battery which can increase with battery size. So you will always have better performance out of a battery electric. for example the worlds fastest Hydrogen super car, the hyperion, is only just barely as fast (not faster) than the Tesla Model S plaid. The difference between the two however is that the hyperion is a purpose built performance car, no cargo space, barely any passeneger space with only 1 passenger seat and a driver seat. the rest of the car is taken up by maximising catalytic surface area and putting in batteries required to boost power output during acceleration. and even then. with all that efford the Hyperion does 0-60 mph in 2.2 seconds. Whilst the Model S plaid, which is a large 4 door 5 seat luxury family sedan with a normal trunk as well as a front truck too, does the same 0-60 in 1.99 seconds. Teslas Large family luxury SUV does this in 2.7s. All that performance without sacrificing practicality. To make hydrogen practical they need to be slow. The Toyota Mirai for example having a blistering 0-60 of 9.2 seconds. Hydrogen is also extremely explosive in the presence of atmosphere, needs to be stored at 32 times the pressure LPG is stored at, and can leak through solid metal. All of that is terrifying from a safety perspective. if you have a bad enough impact you can level a small block. ontop of that the water vapours it emits will corrode the car over time and when hydrogen leaks through solid metal, it embrittles it, making the metal increasingly delicate and liable to shatter. This means that the lifespan of hydrogen vehicles are alot less than combustion cars and even less the Battery Electrics which now have a longer lifespan the combustion cars. There simply is no way around a lot of what I just mentioned. They are physical limitations. For domestic purposes there is no way Hydrogen will be the future. Possibly for trucking and long distance freight or shipping. But not for passenger cars you and me drive. They cost more, are slower, dont last as long and are more dangerous.
    2
  4. Well actually you don’t have to use fossil fuels to create those lubricants. Whilst that’s the most readily available alternative it isn’t the only one. But for EV’s, they don’t need to be replaced every 10,000 miles like a combustion car does.
    2
  5. The longevity?
    2
  6. And where do you get the power to make the hydrogen?
    2
  7.  @jacobmyers35  12v, tells me nothing unless I know the Amps. However 12A by 240V gives you around 3kW the same power as is drawn by an electric kettle. (Not in America they have less power to the outlet than the rest of the world) That produces around 20L of hydrogen per minute (1,200L per hour) seems like a lot doesn’t it? Here’s the problem that’s at atmospheric pressure. There is a reason hydrogen is measured in kg. Not L. At atmospheric pressure 1kg of hydrogen takes up 11,100L. So for your 3kWh you’ve put into your electrolysed (the maximum permissible power from standard home outlets in much of the world) you only made around 100 grams of hydrogen. Or 0.1kg. Hydrogen cars like the Mirai need 5.6kg to fill its tanks. That would take you 52 hours or just over 2 days to accomplish. Not only that but you’d be spending 156kWh to do that. (Ignoring the power required to compress the hydrogen) and require 50L of water. Let’s assume energy costs $0.28/ kWh and $0.00235 per L of water. It costs you around $44 for that 5.6kg of hydrogen that will take you 400 miles. A BEV can charge to 400 miles from the same wall outlet in around 7 hours. It also will take 100kWh, so it will cost you $28. About half the price for the same distance. And much faster
    2
  8.  @jacobmyers35  it only gets worse when you add in power for compression plus the cost of buying all the equipment. And then the transportation to fuel stations.
    2
  9.  @jacobmyers35  also you could reduce the 2 day+ turnover of hydrogen production by increasing the power but you could also do that with BEV’s with 300-400kW, you can charge your EV in 5-10 minutes
    2
  10.  @differencemaker242  I realised it’s not your study. But I’m asking for you to supply a link or the title of the study so I can look at it. Without it you aren’t a messenger, your just someone posting incorrectly assumptions on the internet and trying to pass them as fact by saying there was an ever elusive and unknown “study” that nobody gets to see. If you’re the messenger. Give the message, provide the study. The link. Or the title and author so that I can find it and read it for myself.
    2
  11. Not in the long run.
    2
  12. Not quite what was said. It can handle 25% of cars being electric currently. But the grid is always growing. For example the US grid capacity has grown 85% between 2000 and 2020. Only 2 decades
    2
  13. It hasnt been built yet because whilst is feasible in theory, not so much in practice. what do I mean by that? well lets look at hydrogen plants operating today. One of the most modern Hydrogen plants in the world is the freshly built hydrogen plant built by Toyota in Melbourne Australia. They converted an old factory to both produce hydrogen but also be the states first hydrogen fuel station. An entire car factory, repurposed to produce hydrogen. Keep that in mind. An entire vehicle assembly line. Now it uses a 200kW, state of the art electrolyser to produce its hydrogen, it does so at a rate of 80kg every 24 hours. (which means you would need 4,800kWh of electricity to produce the hydrogen and 720kWh to compress it for storage, so a total of 5,520 kWh per 80kg of hydrogen). That would be enough to fill only 14 Toyota Mirai hydrogen vehicles. an entire factory, to produce enough fuel to only top up 14 cars per day. What i'm outlying to you is how slow and energy intensive hydrogen production is. If we scale that down to a fuel station with maybe 1/5th the size of the plant in Melbourne at best, that means you'd produce conceptually around 1/5th the hydrogen, which would be 20kg of hydrogen, or enough to top up a whopping 3 hydrogen cars per day. Which doesnt really meet demand. Then you are wanting to use on-site renewables instead of grid energy, that means you'd get maybe at best 1/3rd the energy needs over 24 hours from the space taken up by the fuel station, (you only have so much space). that means you'd only realistically be able to produce around 1 hydrogen cars worth of hydrogen per day. a whole fuel station which would have costs millions to retrofit to dispense hydrogen and more again for the hydrogen production equipment and renewables, to only fill up 1 car per day. Its not a great investment. Hence, not practically feasible.
    2
  14. It takes more energy to create the hydrogen that it releases. Even if the system was 100% efficient, you'd still be at a loss. But its far from 100% efficient. you'd lose around 25-30% of your energy creating the hydrogen, then lose 15% compressing it to put it in the tanks, then lost another 40% or more of whats left converting it to electricity to drive the motors. Making hydrogen just costs more energy than the hydrogen produces.
    2
  15. It’s not as expensive to make from a lifespan point of views. Additionally, hydrogen represents worse value in almost every category. It inherently poor for cars. However not everyone of the 9 billion people will own their own cars, currently today, there are 1.4 billion cars on the road. There is more than enough lithium to replace all those cars with batteries especially considering lithium clay extraction.
    2
  16. Home electrolysis devices for automotive fueling is a terrible idea
    2
  17. Well the reason performance Hydrogen doesn’t hit the market, is because of safety requirements. Hydrogen is designed to be lighter than a normal car yet alone a BEV, yet the Mirai is heavier than a Tesla model 3 despite both being mid sized sedans. That’s due to all the reinforcement to protect the fuel tanks the car requires by law. Also something I don’t think you’re realising is that hydrogen is made via Electricity. Electrolysis is literally electrifying water to split it into hydrogen and oxygen. Unfortunately it takes around 3-4 times more electricity from the very same grid, to produce 1km worth of hydrogen vs 1km of charge for a BEV. Additionally it still far more efficient per mile even from coal on grids than petrol or diesel, even before you consider the emissions and power required to refine and transport the fuel. An example of this is that it is literally more fuel efficient to charge your EV from a cheap portable generator than it is to use that fuel in an ICE car. And lastly, the oil industry is VERY much on the side of hydrogen. That’s because hydrogen would require continued dependence on fuel stations which oil companies own a Monopoly on, unlike EV’s which can be charged at home. Additionally the cheapest way to produce hydrogen is by splitting hydro carbons into hydrogen and carbon dioxide. And when I say hydro-carbons, I mean fossil fuels.
    2
  18. You could but not onboard the car. It takes more energy to produce hydrogen than you get from hydrogen
    2
  19.  @jamescampbell4334  My point is. Although it seems like it would be more expedient to have an X5 or similar if you do a lot of long trips. but when you work out the numbers, its actually more beneficial in both time and money to own an EV in many cases. (not all).
    2
  20. no it wouldnt be more efficient. Generating hydrogen somewhere else doesnt magically make it use less energy to produce.
    2
  21.  @shngsam8777  no, hydrogen embrittlement means that if you ran hydrogen through a standard engine the metal block would become brittle and shatter within 50,000km. To add to that whilst LPG gets colder as you use it, hydrogen actually gets hotter. And lastly, it’s output is water, that would corrode the engine components and exhaust system. Oh, also hydrogen can leak through solid metal, yet alone the gaskets found on a normal combustion engine, as such you’d have to replace every seal, ring and gasket in the whole engine.
    2
  22. In the meantime they’ve released a range of battery electric vehicles including and electric M3
    2
  23. But also be incredibly impractical
    2
  24. Battery warrantees these days are around 8 years and they last well longer than that. On average twice as long as a combust car will. Usually when insurance companies claim it’s too expensive to fix, they take the car and they don’t wreck it. They usually fix it in house as cheap as possible and re-sell the vehicle, give that if there are no spare parts, then the insurance is sitting on a goldmine of spare part to keep and charge customers with the same car extreme amounts for spare parts from your wrecked car.
    2
  25. Its not the authors fault that the future prospects for hydrogen is bleak.
    2
  26.  @tomekwenecki4826  can you make the comment clearer. It’s difficult to know where you are going with it.
    2
  27. It really isn’t though. Battery electrics for domestic passenger cars are better in every way. Performance, weight, handling, safety, lifetime, operating costs, efficiency and emissions.
    2
  28. Well fueling is actually a negative thing when considering average domestic uses. Clean output is actually better for battery. So the only True bennefit of hydrogen over BEV is range. Which isn’t as useful as you think it is for domestic passenger cars
    2
  29. That’s why it’s dumb. It’s not dumb got long Range hauling and freight. Is dumb for domestic passenger cars which you and me drive.
    2
  30. You could say the same about batteries. Either way fuel cells currently have a lifespan of 150,000 miles whilst modern EV batteries being sold today have a lifespan of 400,000-500,000 miles.
    2
  31. Not really
    2
  32. Also you can’t swap out the batteries for fuel cells. A few reasons. 1.) fuel cells don’t store the energy. Hydrogen does. It just converts hydrogen into electricity. 2.) fuel cells have notoriously low power output. So you wouldn’t be able to supply the power flow to achieve the performance of the plaid. This coupled with other issues like volume (hydrogen takes up more than twice the volume of batteries) makes it very impractical for vehicles.
    2
  33. ACTUALLY. the worlds single largest producer of Lithium is Australia.
    2
  34. Also, statistically speaking, EV's are 11 times less likely to spontaneously combust compared to combustion engine vehicles, and 5 times less likely to combust in an accident. Confirmed by multiple national centres for statistics, multiple vehicle safety assessment boards, both government and non government operated such as the NCAP safety board, the AANCAP safety board and the NTHSA to name a few. But you wont be hearing that from MSN....
    2
  35.  @kjghrtbdf0ea9pjmnzcmnwreas55  My comments keep disspearing. I think they're going to a spam filter.
    2
  36.  @kjghrtbdf0ea9pjmnzcmnwreas55  fairly simply, just because its reported on alot does not make it common. But it does make it SEEM more common. Its called media bias. If you google media bias for EV fires there will be several papers written on the subjects because its thats prevalent its been the subject of scientific research. In reality its as I said, they are far safer in terms of fire risk than ICE cars. Every institute for statistics and vehicle safety authorities agree with me. browsing their websites will prove it.
    2
  37.  @kjghrtbdf0ea9pjmnzcmnwreas55  as for who produces the most lithium, the country with the highest export of lithium in the world is Australia. they dont have the biggest mines, they dont have the biggest reserves. But they do produce the majority of the worlds lithium.
    2
  38.  @kjghrtbdf0ea9pjmnzcmnwreas55  If Australia, which has its own lithium mines, imported all its lithium of Afghanistan, would that make afghanistan the largest producer of lithium. What you're saying doesnt make sesne. Also BOLIVA has the largest lithium reserves in the world. Australia is the largest producer of lithium, Importing Lithium just to export it would be immensely stupid. and also not something that happens.
    2
  39.  @kjghrtbdf0ea9pjmnzcmnwreas55  what do you mean the residual pollution? you cant just make up terms.
    2
  40.  @kjghrtbdf0ea9pjmnzcmnwreas55  there are in Australia, Laws that extend to imports and exports
    2
  41. Black ice build up
    2
  42.  @TanvirNa  a company does a thing does not mean it’s any more viable. As for 6 hours? No. Super chargers do that in 5-10 minutes. But you only gotta do that for trips you might make once a year or less. For the rest of the time, you charge at home wasting 0 hours of your life getting fuel whilst hydrogen needs to waste as much as 16-17 hours per year on average getting fuel from a fuel station. As for power generation. That’s what I was getting to in my previous comment. Yes, most grids aren’t fully or even mostly green. Most still run of fossil fuels but that isn’t the home run argument you think it is. Hydrogen doesn’t occur naturally in its pure form on earth. You need to split it from things. There are generally 2 ways to do this. First is green hydrogen you split from water (sounds good right?) well not really. Seeing as you need in the order of 3-4 times more grid electricity per mile to create hydrogen than a BEV needs, from the very same electricity grid so not as green, not even close there. The other types of hydrogen production, and by far the most common, is splitting hydrogen out of hydrocarbons. And for those not in the know, hydrocarbons are fossil fuels and when you take the hydro from hydrocarbons, you’re left with just carbon. So to do that you need to burn fossil fuels releasing CO2 to split hydrogen from more fossil fuels, which releases more CO2. This process actually creates more carbon than if you had just used the fossil fuels as a direct fuel in the first place. So again. Not green. Hydrogen cars are also extremely expensive to fuel, are impractical cars, have incredibly short lifespans, slower and don’t even get me started on the fuelling issues.
    2
  43. Oil and gas companies are hydrogens biggest backers.. or havn’t you notice who owns all the fuel stations hydrogen will need to be dispensed from assuming EV’s don’t run them out of business? Or who produces the most cheap hydrogen by mass? Oh yeah, they’re both the gas and fossil fuel industries…
    2
  44.  @TheKingkingg  it’s fairly trivial to prove and explain why oil companies want hydrogen to succeed. And yes, there is a big difference between green and blue hydrogen. One of those big differences is carbon footprints. The other is price. Family already having to pay more money per mile driving on hydrogen versus ICE, will probably want to wipe off $50 a week in fuel at the expense of going green to blue. Additionally where they DONT differ however is how that fuel is dispensed. Hydrogen will always need to be dispense by fuel stations. Those fuel stations are own by fossil Fuel companies. So even with green hydrogen, fossil Fuel companies get to keep their second largest capital investments and single largest income stream.
    2
  45.  @TheKingkingg  that’s nice. And how do they train you in the technical aspects of technology and machinery at a design and analysis level? There is a reason in many places you need to be a registered Engineer. Whilst I too have done plaster, painting, framing, landscaping, even worked as a mechanic for heavy machinery whilst studying at university. Those don’t have little bearing on who I am or what I’m identified as. Same a doctors, for example. If we were talking about a new medical technology or procedure, I’m sure you wouldn’t be singing the same tune to a doctor.
    2
  46.  @oddnick  slight correction. the Battery pack is apart of the chasis, the batteries themselves are not. Tesla batteries are made up of thousands of small 18650 batteries which look like big AA batteries. To replace these you just need to remove the seats and take the floor up then replace them like replacing batteries in a remote. Replacing the battery Pack is expensive. and often cited as a big expense. As it is part of the chasis and also contains cooling and BMS equipment. However replacing the battery pack instead of the batteries is a little like replacing your PS5 controller every time your AA batteries go flat. its nonsensical and a common mis-information tactic used against EV's. In reality to replace the actual batteries it only takes half a day and costs around $4k USD inclusive of labour.
    2
  47. He did, to release enough energy to heat the planets surface enough to melt the ice caps to provide liquid water to mars, like lakes and rivers and clouds. Jumpstart terraforming for human habitation
    2
  48. why, do you sleep for less than 10 minutes a day?
    2
  49. As for hydrogen it needs 2-3 times the same grid energy per km as battery electric to create the hydrogen. From the very same grid you think is inefficient. Then it has to be stored then trucked to its fuel station before going into a car. Problem is as liquid gas heats up, it starts to vaporise and increase pressure. Meaning it’s forced through a Relief valve. Wasting a lot of it. Also is the fact that hydrogen is so small that it can leak through solid steel so you get phantom draining as it’s waiting there in the tank.
    2
  50. Not to mention a headache for you and your neibours using it as a daily driver if you have to get up early for work. If you owned a rumbling V8
    2