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

  1. and also because the science supports it.
    3
  2. That’s actually not true
    2
  3. Because it’s so inefficient. It would be cheaper and safer to just use battery as well as getting better performance.
    2
  4. The life of a fuel cell is around 250,000 miles. Battery life for EV, is greater than 300,000-500,000 miles. Charging times a negligible when you charge at home when you’re not using the car. So in this case hydrogen actually wastes more time needing to refuel. And lastly, hydrogen, due to its inefficiencies are incredibly expensive. You need around 3 times more of the same grid energy to produce and deliver 1 miles worth of hydrogen, than you would to charge an EV 1 miles worth of energy. Then the hydrogen producer needs to sell it to fuel stations. And then fuel stations need to add a profit markup ONTOP of that. So it’s all very expensive
    2
  5. well actually no. thats not the full story, BEV's are buy in large, lighter than their Hydrogen counter parts. The Mirai, a mid-sized sedan, is heavier than the Telsa model 3, also a mid sized sedan. Why is this so? because Hydrogen requires the chassis to be greatly stiffened to divert crash energy around the fuel tanks. This reduces crumple zone reducing overall safety but also greatly increases the weight. So while the power train of hydrogen is exceptionally light compared to BEV's Hydrogen vehicles weigh more. This doesnt get better with size either, as larger sizes need larger battery sizes (hydrogen needs batteries because they cant supply the power flow required to accelerate the vehicle adequately.). Lets look at the Hydrogen semi, the Hyundai Xcient vs the Tesla Semi, the Tesla Semi, unloaded weighs, (estimated) 9.5T, the Xcient weighs 9.7T. in addition the Semi, from on road testing, can go over 500 miles fully loaded while the Xcient can only do 400 miles fully loaded. Additionally the Xcient cant reach freeway speeds even unloaded whilst the Tesla semi while fully loaded can still out drag most cars on the road. Depsite the Xceint have a 75 kWh battery, the same size battery as the long range Model 3. Another thing to consider with cargo and passengers is space. in Litres (L), BEV's have around 0.71 kWh/L volumetric energy density, Hydrogen itself as a gas has 1.4 kWh/L. So no brainer? not quite. Hydrogen has to be stored in fuel tanks. Those fuel tanks are round tanks fitting into a rectangular base. (fit a round peg into a square hole and notice the empty space). the hydrogen system also requires 1 inch fuel tank thicknesses, adding 2 inches to the diameter, all together that brings the practical volumetric energy density of hydrogen down to 0.62 kWh/L, add the inefficiency of the access to the power (only 60% used by the fuel cell) and you get 0.37 kWh/L less than half the 0.71 kWh/L of BEV's. That means you have less space for passengers and cargo. Not only that but you also have to add a battery pack to the hydrogen can plus a fuel cell. This sacrifice in space can be seen in the Mirai, The mirai is a whole foot longer than the model 3 but identical cross sectional size. The mirai has no front trunk like the model 3, it has so little cabin space that a groove had to be cut out of the roof to allow legally adequate head room, and the rear seats dont even have enough space to fold down unlike the model 3 which is a big problem, because whilst he model 3 has a very large boot, the Mirai has a boot 100L smaller than that of a Toyota Yarris half it size. So no, you dont get alot of space. You can also see this in the Xcient as it takes up vertical space on the trailer bed reducing the vertical height for cargo, it also extends the rear of the semi's bed much longer out taking up almost a full trailers width, this significantly impacts its turning circle, something the Battery Electric Tesla Semi doesnt have a problem with.
    2
  6. unlikely
    1
  7. It doesn’t run on water. It runs on hydrogen and the exhaust is water vapour
    1
  8. Good for you?
    1
  9. you dont want an hydrogen "battery". Hydrogen vehicles already use lithium batteries for regen purposes and for acceleration as fuel cells power output is very very low. But whilst batteries charging and discharging is around 98% efficient, a fuel cell converting hydrogen to water to create electricity is only around 60% efficient and its only around 70% going the other way, water into hydrogen, but the hydrogen also needs to be compressed which makes it only 55% efficient.
    1
  10. There is alot wrong here. Firstly EV's are far far more efficient than even Diesel engines or Hydrogen cars. Whilst they dont store as much energy has ICE cars do with fuel, they are far more efficient, around 80-90% efficient compared to Petrol's 25-30% and Diesel's 35-40%. And time it takes to charge? depends on whats charging it and when. For example a modern V3 super charger and fully charge an EV within 5-15 minutes. But thats not how most people would charge, They usually charge at home since electricity is provided to the home, not just fuel stations. meaning you plug it in when you get have and you wake up to a full tank. 99% of the year that means 0 time spend waiting for a charge and 0 times spent getting fuel which saves the average person 16-17 hours per year of getting fuel. Something a Hydrogen car would suffer from. and as for the range, its not 50%. the average range of a petrol car is around 410 miles, Modern EV's current sit between 250-400 miles with the Long Range model S getting 412 miles. Then you go on to talk about space of batteries vs hydrogen. well there is something you're forgetting to factor it. weight isn't volume. Whilst hydrogen and fuel weigh alot less than batteries do, they both take up more VOLUME than batteries do. Especially hydrogen practically having something in the order of less than half the Volumetric energy density of batteries. A Tesla Model S can go 412 miles on its batteries and have extra room in the boot and cabin and even room in the front for a front trunk making it extraordinarily spacious for a car of its size. Meanwhile the Toyota Mirai, being a similar size to the Model S carries a lite, 5.6kg of hydrogen, but that takes up almost 150L of fuel tank volume (more fuel tanks than a Ford F250!). it also has to carry an exhaust system, and a fuel cell. This means no front trunk, a boot that so small its almost a full 100L smaller than that of a Toyota Yaris less than half it size, and so little cabin space you cant physically fold the rear seats to extend your already deeply compromised boot space. So unlike your thoughts on the subject, there is room to put more batteries into an EV if you wanted more than 400 miles of range. But there is NO more room to add more fuel tanks to a Hydrogen car if you want to extend its range. Its maxed out already.
    1
  11. How exactly do you think hydrogen is produced? Magic? BEV’s even from fuel stations emit significantly less emissions than an ICE car. Infact it’s more fuel efficient to charge your EV off an 8kW generator than it is to use that same diesel in even a highly efficient modern Diesel engine. Hydrogen however is produce two ways. 1.) they use fossil fuels (hydro-carbons) to create it. This takes a lot of grid energy to split the hydro from the carbons. You get hydrogen but also a lot of carbon emissions. 2.) green hydrogen. You use grid energy to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. This process from wells to wheels take more than 3 times the amount of grid energy from the same grid you charge your BEV per mile. Plus sales markups from the supplier and from the fuel station meaning it’s significantly more expensive than normal fuel. And BEV’s are significantly less expensive than even normal fuel.
    1
  12. Probably never. Hydrogen would be too expensive
    1
  13. A lot of cars are more expensive in NZ for varying reasons but mostly due to its remoteness and needing to ship them between islands
    1
  14. They won’t run on water
    1
  15. @Lee Jon This is actually incorrect. Whilst hydrogen is energy dense, in terms of kWh/kg, it is not energy dense in kWh/L. In-fact in practical applications, hydrogen is well and truly less than half the volumetric energy density of batteries. Lets look at two prototype vehicles currently undergoing road trials. The Hydrogen fuel cell semi, the Hyundai Xcient, and the Tesla Semi. The Hyundai Xcient holds almost twice as much fuel in terms of capacity, than a standard diesel semi does, even then it can only get 400 miles of range fully loaded. It has to carry a 75 kWh battery pack (the same size a long range Tesla Model 3) so it can adequately accelerate. Its power plant consists of 2 hydrogen fuel cells as well. To fit all this in, you take up all of your room. In fact the rear part of the semi extends almost the entire length of the first trailer giving it a horrendous turning circle, it also is tall vertically reducing the vertical room for the first trailer meaning it has to have specially made first trailers before picking up conventional trailer. Another issue is that the Xcient cant actually get to freeway speeds, even unloaded. It does not have enough power. (as fuel cells are inherently low power output). It can only get to 85km/h maximum, (53 mph). All ontop of that is the fact that the fuel cells for the Xcient are only rated to last around 100,000 miles, and the fuel tanks will only last 10 years. The trucks are extremely short lived. By comparison lets look at the Tesla Semi currently undergoing road trials with selected customers. Fully loaded the Semi can get further than 500 miles. At super chargers it can charge up fully in under 30 minutes and can top up at destinations. it can reach freeway speeds fully loaded, going uphill, faster than most cars. It costs significantly less in fuel than a hydrogen truck, it lifespan is rated at 1,500 cycles for the battery (lab results confirmed through real world results from the rest of the Tesla fleet). meaning it would have a lifespan of around 750,000 miles. It has no issues with turning circles or vertical heights. But most people still bring up that they want to save the 30 minutes to recharge at the extensive super charging infrastructure and would prefer to fill up their hydrogen trucks in 5 minutes from any of the non-existent hydrogen fuel stations. To that there is a small hickup. Most countries such as the EU, USA, Australia, Canada, UK, etc etc etc have laws on how long a truck driver is allowed to drive per day. For example in the US truck drivers are not allowed to drive more than 11 hours per day. And in between their 5th and 8th hour of driving they must take a minimum of 30 minutes break. The Tesla Semi has enough range for around 9 hours of driving. Meaning you can more than comfortably make it to your 30 minute break by pulling over at a super charger, you will get a full charge within that 30 minutes, and be on your way for the rest of your 11 hour drive that remains (4-6 hours driving) before you have to pull over for the day, possibly at a destination charger which would charge your truck all the way up overnight or at a super charger to plug in right before you leave again. Meaning needing to charge up wastes no time at all for truck drivers. This means the tesla can go freeway speeds spending less time transporting cargo which makes it cheaper in man hours for freight, it costs 20x less per mile for fuel compared to the Xcient, which saves money, you get more vertical height in your first trailer compared to the Xcient which means more cargo which is more money and the Tesla Semi will last more than 7 times longer than the Xcient which again, saves more money. It seems like there is a clear winner here.
    1
  16. I’m willing to bet most people won’t accept hydrogen for domestic cars
    1
  17. thats not at all true
    1
  18. FCEV’s don’t store water. They store hydrogen and use it to create electricity to drive an electric motor through a fuel cell.
    1
  19. actually no. You still have to use energy to split the water into hydrogen and oxygen. It solves nothing
    1
  20. not that big. Especially considering the drawback in volume and lifespan and cost and performance
    1
  21. Uhh. Not quite.. no. There is no naturally occurring hydrogen on earth. There are two methods of extracting hydrogen. The cheapest is to separate it from fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are “hydrocarbons” and you separate the hydrogen from the carbon. The byproduct is a shit ton of carbon. The most greenest way to produce hydrogen is with electrolysis. The overall efficiency wells to wheel (optimistically) is around 30%. Electrolysis runs from grid electricity like Battery electrics do. But hydrogen will need 3 times the grid electricity per Km worth of hydrogen compared to a battery electric. So if you had a grid with fossil fuels on it; the emissions footprint is 3 times more of you went the greenest and most expensive route and even larger if you go the cheap option. Hydrogen also has to be sold from the producer at a profit to fuel station which then gets sold again at a profit to the end user. Making hydrogen, even the cheapest option, significantly more expensive the even combustion cars. While Battery electrics are around 10x cheaper per km than combustion cars. If you produce hydrogen on a fully green grid you would need 3 times the power plants to produce the required hydrogen. Compared to battery electric. So if a Tesla needed 1 wind turbine to operate. A hydrogen could would need you to build 3 wind turbines. Hydrogen is also one of the most volatile gasses known to man. It is extremely explosive and needs to be held at pressures more than 30 times the required pressure of even LPG gas. It is compressed to excessively deadly pressures and even a small leak can lead to a huge explosion as it is so very readily ignitable when mixed with air. Hydrogen cars have to protect the fuel tanks over the occupants, as a fuel tank explosion could take out every car and pedestrian around it. Making them decidedly less safe than battery electric which themselves are significantly safer than combustion cars.
    1
  22. As opposed to using 3 times the amount of energy to generate the same distance worth of hydrogen and then not only having to buy that 3 times more electricity inherent in the cost of hydrogen but also paying the expenses and markup of the hydrogen producer and again from the fuel station? BEV’s are fundamentally more efficient with ranges and lifetimes for domestic vehicles well exceeding practical use.
    1
  23. It won’t take off
    1
  24. Technically they work. They are just inefficient and costly.
    1
  25. Power paste isn’t a good way to keep hydrogen. Although energy dense, pushing paste through an hydrolizer is very difficult and in itself, inefficient. And now you need a way to separating the hydrogen from, and disposal of the other substances making up the power paste.
    1
  26. Why?
    1
  27. its not about reliability, its about technology. and sorry, hydrogen vehicles are just inferior in the domestic vehicle market.
    1
  28. The question is how much?
    1
  29.  @MatthewUseda  true and weather you’d have to use that power to pump oil out of the ground then burn more fuel to transport it to a refinery where it uses more grid power and burns straight crude oil to refine it into fuel where it is then trucked again to fuel stations burning more fuel to finally end up in your car where you then burn it.
    1
  30. I hope you’re ready to wait another few hundred years and theb
    1
  31. except the science supports him on hydrogen.
    1
  32. Hydrogen cars don’t work on combustion but hydrogen is one of the most explosive gasses known to man. It’s incredibly volatile. It also has to be stored at pressures 30-40 times higher than LPG tanks have to be stored at
    1
  33. Still doesnt mean they arent stupid. Hydrogen makes for horrendous cars.
    1
  34. its hard to argue with physics. Although there is nothing wrong with how the cars themselves work they arnet exactly value for money. They cost way more per mile, use far more electricity per miles worth of hydrogen than a BEV, they are slower and have less passenger and cargo space than BEV's or even ICE equivalents also. Ontop of that they have a short lifespan. The fuel cell only lasts around 100,000 miles and due to hydrogen embrittlement the fuel tanks are only rated to last 10 years before they have to be retired. Seriously, get your friend to show you the inside of his fuel cap. it has an expiration "DO NOT FILL AFTER... xxx/xxx/xxx" date on there limiting the life of the car to 10 years. So you get something 10 times more expensive to run thats 3 times slower and has less passenger space and cargo space than a car half it size and it wont even last very long.
    1
  35. Oil companies want it to succeed over BEV’s for 2 reasons 1.) the cheapest way to make hydrogen is with fossil fuels. Keeping oil companies up and running. 2.) unlike Battery Electrics you have to go to a fuel station to get your hydrogen. Oil companies have a monopoly on fuel stations. With hydrogen they keep one of their largest income streams going and don’t end up wasting thousands of not millions of investments in fuel stations around the world.
    1
  36. Hydrogen won’t take for domestic applications. Long distance freight yes. But domestic no.
    1
  37.  @happiprod.8160  well I wouldn’t dismiss self driving just yet. I have a Tesla model 3. At current I can put navigate on autopilot on when I hit the on ramp. It will merge traffic, overtake slower cars, deal with stop start traffic, correct take and merg into and out of highway interchanges and take the correct off ramp all on its own. It will pull up at stop lights and go when they turn green again and can park and unpark itself.
    1
  38. Well modern BEV’s actually have ranges similar to hydrogen up around the 300-400 mile mark. Additionally, if you have power at your home, all you gotta do is plug it in every night at home and you have effectively a full tank every day. Hydrogen isn’t very practical though. Even just looking at the use of the car. Hydrogen is light weight but takes up a huge volume. Take the Toyota Mirai for example. Similar size to the Tesla Model 3 but slightly larger. It has a boot so small that it’s actually 100L smaller than a Toyota Yaris’s boot. A car less than half its size. And it has so little cabin space that you can’t actually fold the rear seats down to extend the boot. And unlike the Tesla it has no front boot. That’s all because it has to have 5.6kg of hydrogen to travel 400 miles. But that takes up 141L of fuel tank volume. That’s a larger fuel tank in a midsized sedan than you’d find on a Ford F-150! The model 3 has near class leading cargo space with a generous boot, a second boot within it under a false floor where a fuel tank would be, and the front engine bay is another boot again. It also has huge cabin space for its size and is able to fold the rear seats to extend the boot. Then there is getting the hydrogen. You can get electricity anywhere. Infact even from a wall power point charger you can charge the car outside in the rain running an extension cable. It takes a number of hours yes but you can do it overnight whilst asleep. No time out of your day, with full range every single morning. Instead of finding somewhere once per week to get hydrogen from. Another factor to practicality is cost of operation. To drive a model 3 it costs you approximately 2 cents per mile to operate. Hydrogen is very expensive on the other hand, costing you 20x more per mile to drive. And finally modern EV’s are designed to last a long time, contrary to popular belief, modern EV’s are designed to last up to 500,000 miles before the battery is deemed to need replacing. That’s twice the average lifespan of a combustion engine. Infact older 2012 generation EV’s are already punching over 400,000 to 500,000 miles on their original batteries. Meanwhile, hydrogen vehicles come off the assembly line with an expiration date printed on the fuel cap, limiting the life of the vehicle to only 10 years.
    1
  39.  @hikaru9624  how are they worrying and how is a hydrogen vehicle more practical/desirable
    1
  40.  @hikaru9624  I live rurally in Australia and I own a model 3. Not even the long range but the standard range. It has around 400km of range. I don’t have to stop at a service station for a few hours. I just run a cable out from my carport and charge the car while I’m asleep and every day I have a fresh 400km. Modern EV’s use heat pumps to keep batteries warm in the winter, only representing a 5% loss, as opposed to 40 for older generation EV’s. It even if it were 20%, you’d still have 320km range. That’s around 200 miles every day worth of range. I’m struggling to see how that’s impractical.
    1
  41. It’s not just Elon saying it. Would you like me to break down why it is stupid?
    1
  42. Current Battery technology, will last far longer than even ICE engines, yet alone hydrogen which has a further limited life. You talk about batteries degrading over time (20% over 500,000 miles for current generation batteries) hydrogen fuel cells also degrade over time (current Hydrogen Fuel cells only last approximately 100,000-150,000 miles and reduce in power and increase fuel consumption as they approach that end of life) In addition the car degrades over time, Hydrogen embrittlement of metals result in the fuel tanks themselves being limited to 10-15 years depending on the manufacturer. Every fuel cell car comes off the assembly line with an expiration date printed on the fuel cap limiting its life to only around 10 years. Much shorter than a batteries lifespan. Ironically, the battery in a fuel cell vehicle is the longest serving part of the car. Hydrogen fuel will always cost significant more than charging a BEV because not only do you have to re-sell hydrogen with profit margins and all, you also have to use 3-4 times the same electricity from the same power grid in order to make hydrogen. Its probably also worth noting the lithium batteries do not explode, they smoulder for hours releasing smoke before you see visible flames. But if we're talking about safety, BEV's are the clear winner. In comparison to Hydrogen is actually explosive
    1
  43. @Lee Jon Tesla recycle all their old expired batteries
    1
  44. Hydrogen will never be a real threat to BEV's
    1
  45. on?
    1
  46. Technically speaking the volumetric energy density of hydrogen is smaller than it is for BEV's contextually. Hydrogen itself is more energy dense than BEV batteries, but the tanks are cylindrical with rounded ends. That makes it hard utilize the space around the tank, the tanks are also about an inch thick so that adds 2 inches to the diameter of thanks. If you work out the cubed volume encasing the cylindrical tanks the volumetric energy density of hydrogen is alot less than BEV's (thick about drawing the biggest circle you can inside square. you'll never fill it)
    1
  47. Hydrogen also uses batteries. Hydrogen uses fuel cells which contain platinum which is far more toxic than anything in a battery, Hydrogen cars last around 4 times less than battery electrics and lastly, it takes far more energy to create hydrogen than what you get out of it in terms of range. For example 50 kWh of grid electricity can get an EV approximately 305-400km of driving but if you used that same 50kWh of grid energy to create hydrogen you'd only get around 50km worth of range out of it. And you need alot of grid energy to produce hydrogen because hydrogen is found naturally occurring on earth in its pure form.
    1
  48.  @nickthesoldier7260  well the fundamental laws of physics show that hydrogen would be a very poor investment in comparison to EV for private domestic passenger vehicles. Id be happy to explain it to you but there is almost no category where hydrogen actually holds the advantage in that market. Being green, efficiency, performance, safety, cost, practicality etc etc etc
    1
  49. I have an EV. I love cars and I love driving. I often just go for a drive through the windy hills for the fun of it. What makes you think EV owners must hate cars and driving. Driving an EV is unlike driving any other vehicle. With instant peak torque on demand at any time, no gear changes, nothing, not even a rev up. Plus the way that they have such a low centre of gravity that you dont sway around corners at all. without losing the suspension dynamics of having to install an anti-sway bar. it all makes for a unique and fun drive. Thats why the model 3 was voted worlds number 1 car for driver satisfaction and the Tesla model Y, S and X are all in the top 10 according to consumer reports. So that doesnt really gell with your.... hypothesis.
    1
  50. Actually no. Only very select countries are going hydrogen. The rest of the world is going plug in. But buy in large most countries are trying to open up the opportunity for both. But hydrogen can’t really compete with plug ins.
    1