Honestly, people speak so high and mighty about how hydrogen cars vehicles will takeover Electric cars. We should be speaking more about how hydrogen fueled cars should be replacing Gas fueled cars.
We should stop talking about hydrogen cars. It will cost you twice in fuel costs and be worse for the environment. Hydrogen cars are stupid. Edit: Yes I know that the actual chemical reaction makes water. My point is that the process of making, transporting, and storing hydrogen is inefficient.
a car that gets stuck for hours everytime it needs to be refueled is alot more 'stupid' than a car that can be refueled in minutes.. point is consumers do not like battery powered cars, massive subsidies and still no one wants them, they are less than 1% of sales and they have limitations the ICE cars they are supposed to replace do not have. inferior technology never overtakes superior tech and fossil fueled ICE cars will always be superior to battery powered cars.. their refueling stations will always be everywhere and they will always take just minutes to give you another 600km and more electric than you need.
@@samk2266 You clearly know almost nothing about electric cars. While electric cars may seem inferior now, they will be the obvious choice in the future. For likely 95% of people, they will not drive much more than 30 miles a day and they will most likely not go on a road trip super often. Most electric car owners never have to worry about charging their car. They can do it at home. And it's cheap. Electric cars also have better performance especially at similar price points to ICE cars. Battery technology is advancing fast. I would'nt be surprised if in 5 years we have a battery that can charge twice as fast, or goes twice the distance. Electric motors also open up many new options for software, like fully autonomous driving. ICE engines are fairly unreactive compared to electric engines, you can not fit as many features into a gasoline engine as an electric one. Frankly, the only problem with electric cars is that they take a while to charge. This is really only a problem on road trips, the vast majority of people will rarely ever care, and most people will count waiting an extra hour a few times a year worth it for having a car that can 1. accelerate faster 2. saves money and 3. drives itself. I totally understand that an electric car may not be the right choice for you, but it is extremely obvious that EVs will only get more popular.
@@samk2266 I never ever get "stuck for hours" recharging my EV. I recharge it at home, mostly from home-made solar power, or at a destination charger (hotel) while I sleep or do business. I spent a total of 2.5 hours over the course of 2019 at supercharger stations while on longer trips. This compares to spending 6-10 hours per year in total filling an ICE car at a gas station. One more thing you seem not to know, Sam: while it may take 5 mn to fuel a hydrogen car, the hydrogen tank of the fueling station then needs to be recompressed, and that takes quite some time. So, a single hydrogen station can refuel only a few (3-5) cars per hour, and costs around a million! How much does a wall outlet cost for overnight charging of a BEV?
0:17 "the most abundant resource in the universe" Irrelevant. We are on earth. On earth it can only be found naturally, tied to atoms like carbon, oxygen and nitrogen. It takes energy to extract the hydrogen.
Well, consumers aren't always after the efficiency. If they were ICE engines wouldn't have taken off in the first place. When it comes to mass produced consumer vehicles the determining factors are convenience and cost (Overall).
This video is an advertising lie! They don't lie about what they say. What is lied about is what is not said. It is lying when you deliberately conceal or belittle important facts.
@Sonymnms 52 No... Hydrogen for cars is not a viable option economically either now or in future for Hydrolysis is very costly, and can not be refined further.So, no matter what we do, Hydrogen will always be 8 to 9 times more costlier than gasoline. Also, because it is most combustible and require more maintenance/care during transportation and storage which adds to the cost. Unlike charging stations(Wayyyyy cheaper) or even gas stations(installation cost $10k to $20k), Hydrogen fueling station setup costs a fortune(Millions). And home charging is an option that I don't think HEVs can beat.
Sonymnms 52 There are way more arguments than only the lack of infrastructure. - combustion engines and the drivetrains lose way more energy to heat, friction and gearing compared to an electric car. Therefore cars with an electric drivetrains are more efficiënt. - Using green energy to turn water into hydrogen with electrolysis is an inefficient process that costs way more energy compared to charging the car directly. And to make enough hydrogen for everyone you need an impossibly big factory. -Hydrogen is instable and highly explosive and needs to be stored in special pressurised tanks. Refueling on a large scale will he problematic and dangerous without proper safetymeasures, a problem an alectric car doesnt have. You can also charge an electric car at home. - Transporting hydrogen with a truck to a gasstation is less efficiënt than charging a car through the powergrid. Im a petrolhead, i ride a motorcycle and love classic cars, but the sad truth is the combustion engine isnt going to survive. The battery capacity and technology are improving rapidly and many car manufacturers are switching to electric and are also investing in the chargingstation infrastructure, I just don’t see where the hydrogen car fits in.
@Sonymnms 52, no, FCEVs are a dumb idea, first and foremost, because the technology results in crappy cars. Do you want to pay $57,000 for a four seat heavy midsize sedan with poor handling, limited cargo space, and a 0-60 of 9 seconds that has very limited refueling options, or would you rather spend the same money on the Model 3 Performance instead of the Mirai, seat five, have good cargo space, great handling, and get to 60 in just 3.2 seconds while mostly recharging in your garage? The infrastructure will NEVER be built, because new technologies that are inferior in every way, like FCEV is, never get adopted. Even comparing the Mirai with the Prius, the Prius wins every single category and costs half as much, pollutes less, and can fuel just as fast but at 12,500 California locations instead of just 25. No amount of dishonesty will convince buyers to spend luxury car money for economy car specs. Not happening.
Sonymnms 52 they can be, there are 2 types of hydrogen powered cars... Hydrogen Fuel cell and hydrogen combustion engine. Hydrogen fuell cells only have a max of 50% efficiency...so it only makes sense as a range extender.. And in both cases you still have most of the problems I mentioned earlier..
@Sonymnms 52 it is an electric vehicle that costs 5 times as much to fill up, is slow, with an expensive fuel cell, and has a huge round pressurized hydrogen tank instead of a flat or space-conforming battery pack. And you can't plug the damn thing up anywhere. The efficiency of a hybrid for twice the price and none of the convenience. Brilliant.
No charging at home, very high maintenance, high costs and hugely expensive and explosive compressing stations that can only fill a handfull of cars per day. Plus hydogen that's made fom methane and has to be transported by truck. Congrats!
eat - Many think that hydrogen is prepared by electrolysis of water. It can be, but it is enormously energy consuming. And something has to be done with the oxygen besides releasing it, or the portion of the energy used that is represented by the separation of the oxygen is wasted. Hydrogen's pluses are that its only combustion product is water. That is unless the compression ratio is high enough to produce nitrogen oxides, which are pernicious smog irritants. If the compression ratio is lower, efficiency is lost. If hydrogen escapes, it goes up, which is safer than gasoline and propane. When hydrogen is extracted from methane, what is done with the carbon? What energy source separates the hydrogen from the carbon without letting it burn?
@Sonymnms 52 You do not seem to understand that the vast majority of people can charge enough at home while they sleep to cover all of their daily driving and then some. "No one cares" should actually say "most people care". Do you actually look forward to going to the gas station? Do you know anyone that smiles when they realize they are forced to go fill up with gas because they love it so much? It's a chore. It's one we are used to, but it is a chore none the less. You can literally eliminate the need to go to any kind of gas station for your day to day driving and somehow you think people WANT to keep that in their lives? And road trips account for less than 5% of most people's driving so I wouldn't buy a car with extra inconvenience 95% of the time just to make it a little more convenient 5% of the time.
David fuel is very bad but battery isn’t perfect it’s no renewable just like gas it takes a lot of energy to extract the metals from the ground and China controls all of the production and you have to replace you’re battery in 5 years gas isn’t the solution but neither is battery
@@neilmurphy6136 Solar energy costs between 2 and 4 cents a kWh and if you charge your car directly from solar, you have very little transmission losses compared to the grid or hydrogen on trucks.
@@neilmurphy6136 Replacing the battery in 5 years? absolutely not true, we are not talking about phone batteries that loose a significant amount of power over 2-5 years but about massive batteries that last way longer, just the Nissan Leaf battery alone is designed to last at least 10 years in the car and then many more as stationary power source. Tesla probably would not give you a 8 year warrany on your battery if you would have to replace it every 5 years.
Hydrogen Station in Oslo can only refuel about 15 cars then the pressure drops drastically. And it cost 4 million dollars to build. Only someone on Colombia diet will support hydrogen for personal transport.
Ou8y2k2 why was this nowhere in the news? At least not in my country. When a Tesla catches fire after an accident they report about it for at least a month.
Why does everyone love to hate hydrogen. I understand it has issues as all things, but everyone neglects to mentions BEVs fall downs. Charge times, battery degradation, mining, mining pollution, weight, recycling. The Tesla semi is set to have either 3.3 or 5.5tons of batteries! Hydrogen would actually be better suited in this case but people are so fixated on BEVs, whether it be because of miss information or their Tesla stocks it baffles me.
The cost of having a hydrogen powered truck makes it unreasonable. the average size of a normal gas tank is 12 gallons, while the average tank size of a semi truck is 120 gallons. A hydrogen cars tank is roughly 4 gallons and if the ratio of a hydrogen semi tank compared to a normal hydrogen car is the same as gasoline then the tank on the semi would be about 40 gallons. If you fill up a hydrogen car all the way at a gas station it would cost you around $80, so if you filled up the truck it would cost $800. The range of the truck might improve because the hydrogen will make the car lighter but if optimally the trucks range is 400 miles you are paying $2 a mile for your truck. compare that with the gasoline truck that would cost $400 to fill up and gets 1000 miles of range. it is completely unreasonable to think that anyone would switch to paying twice as much for gas but getting less than half of the range that you would get from diesel. the tesla semi on the other hand has a range of 500 miles and costs around $100. the large amount of batteries is definitely a flaw because the fossil fuel cost to manufacture them will be immense, but paying 8 times less for gas is worth it. Battery degradation is a problem but not as bad as you make it out to be. Tesla's batteries are reported to have a 10 to 15% battery degradation between 150,000 to 200,000 miles. The average truck drives about 45,000 miles per year. this would mean that if you were to replace the battery as soon as it started to degrade you would do so every 4 ish years. To buy a new battery for the truck it would probably cost a max of $60,000. that seems like a lot but remember that it only costs $100 to fill up the truck, you are saving $300 every time you fill up and if a truck fills up every 1000 miles in 4 years you would of saver about $54,000. that is less than 60,000 but shelling out 6,000 every 4 years to keep your truck's battery in perfect condition is a minor expense.
@@gunnarchristianson6726 You can make your own hydrogen at home for free from solar panels if that's your concern. It's only 80$ because of the returns the industry must reach out of tiny amount of customers. It's basic economics of demand and supply. If hydrogen was produced industrially for nationwide use, the price would drop exponentially. In high volume the profit gap would even out on a lot of customers and the basic cost would decrease to energy cost. The only cost of hydrogen fuel is the energy lost in conversion straight from electricity, which the industry can get out of the lines. People are just misled. For every 1 KWh of energy is required for 5 KWh of H2 energy which is pretty good comparing the electricity cost per KWh of electricity needed. Nobody understands how important it is to have a car that uses a chemical that is everywhere around us and converts back to itself.
Hydrogen cars don't make any sense batteries have higher energy density, safer, less expensive and more readily available and practical hydrogen cars may have made more sense in the 80's before more modern batteries but now I'd imagine hydrogen cars will make up very small part of the market
@@treymansfield7919 I disagree in part, while it's true that they're safer, less expensive is not a given, BEVs were super expensive a decade and half ago, its a matter of scale. Also, lithium is taxing on the planet, very polluting, and while it is reusable to a degree, it's going to be very bad for the planet if it becomes the main fuel source for humanity's cars. H2 is extremely versatile because a) it is easy to add to existing gas stations, as it works similarly, so infrastructure is an easy solution b) it is readily available everywhere and c) it is much more accesible for long haul drives
This poorly researched video uses quotes like, “78% of automative executives believe that fuel cell vehicles will be the breakthrough for electric mobility”. Adding a percentage to an opinion does not make it a fact. I truly believe that this video was paid for by the oil industry (currently hydrogen is produced as a bi-product of oil refinement).
C 9 Hydrogen has and for the (forseeable future) costs more something like 9 times that of gasoline. I’ve been hearing about Hydrogen cars being the wave of the future for last 25 years and they’re still “just on the horizon”
I like how they forgot to mention the extremely inefficient method of how we get hydrogen.Even though it's abundant it's extraction is completely coal based it actually harms the environment more than coal produced electricity
That means we should still produce hydrogen even through inneficient method, even if it's only at 10% efficiency, for the sake of the environment and our future generations in hundreds of years. Mother nature don't care about your greed if we don't do something it's gonna back clash at us, our future generations.
@@pilotavery if u r referring to electrolysis ND the amount of electricity is uses which is obtained from burning fossil fuels not very efficient m8 unless u r obtaining it from renewable sources but it won't be a waste of nrg cos it wud be better to put it directly into an electric car then first use it to obtain hydrogen then hydrogen to run a car on electricity . Energy is wasted
Even AC was something weird at Tesla’s time but now the reality is much different. Every house use that. The same for hydrogen cars, everybody makes jokes about them but the future will do the same as it did with the AC and DC...
@@grimsobad8545 9 year old: where are my finger paints? I'll build hydrogen cars in my spare time. (same kid @ 30)- geez! it costs like $5 a gallon just to make hydrogen. this is stupid. WHERE'S THE BEV ?
@@HeresTheGenZFlorentineFolks. scientists & engineers, not to mention nasa & darpa have been trying to crack that code since 1950. and? THEY'VE GOTTEN NOWHERE. next you'll say that fusion is just 5 years away. AGAIN. battery tech? just as soon as someone poured a few $100k at the problem? solutions started popping up all over the place. since the very FIRST battery that ever existed? (1860, lead acid) we've gone from lead acid to nicad to nickel metal hydride to lithium ion to 4680 lithium dry chemistry (5 iterations & MANY times the energy density) in 160 years- the EXACT same amount of time that electrolysis has been around- except? electrolysis hasn't gotten any more efficient than it was in 1860. no real ground breaking developments- nothing to make it profitable to invest in. even spacex doesn't use hydrogen for rockets & that's the ONLY place it ever made even the slightest amount of sense.
Business Insider: BEVs are too heavy. FCEVs are light! 2019 Tesla Model 3 long range BEV: I weigh 4072 lbs. 2019 Toyota Mirai FCEV: I weigh 4075 lbs. Business Insider: Oops!
Business Insider: BEVs are too expensive and don't go as far 2019 Tesla Model 3 long range BEV: $48,990 travels 322mi 2019 Toyota Mirai FCEV: $59,455 travels 312mi
They both have the same relative weight. Power trains are pretty much the same. At the scale of a car it doesn't work out. Now the scale of a 3/4 ton truck that equation favors a fuel cell.
@@HK-cw1kz Hidrogen will never make sense, because in order to mass produce it, you have to use electricity. So in the end Hidrogen will work as a very inneficient battery, with very expensive infrastructure needed in order to re charge it. Only compressing hydrogen yields you 50% less energy. If you add efficienct of running cell backwards (to produce hidrogen from electricity and water), then you get luckyly 40% efficiency overall. So basically a very ineeficient battery. The only place it can have, is if the fuel cell becomes so cheap it's basically free. Then people will pay a little more for gas in order to be filled a little bit faster.
Business Insider: BEVs can only increase range by increasing battery size, with diminishing returns due to weight. 2019 Nissan Leaf, Kia Soul: double the range with the same size and weight battery as previous gen. 2019 Tesla cars and Jaguar iPace: increases range via an over-the-air updates. 2019 Toyota Mirai: same range as in 2015 because the size of the tank literally can't be any bigger, and there already is no boot space.
Thus is quite a typical worry Totally unfounded as it is much safer than liquid fuels. In a major accident the worst thing would be a rupture of the tank. Within a few seconds the gas would escape and all would be safe. This is not true with petrol as it will flow over everything and when lit will burn ferociously.
@@gissit1967 Hydrogen is extremely difficult to seal, it can escape through microscopically small gaps. And if it ignites the flames are invisible to the eye. It also has a low lower-explosive-limit (LEL). Hydrogen...liquid or vapor.... is a very tricky substance, it is not benign.
@@9UaYXxB Yes, I spent 20 years in the oil industry and am well aware of the challenges. None are insurmountable though. It is still safer in many ways than liquid hydrocarbons. On a vehicle, any leak would soon dissipate as the quantities are quite small. Storage tanks and fuelling stations are a lot more dangerous though. Batteries are not without risks either.
"The problem with teslas are they are far too expensive for the average car buyer." literally 2 sentences later. "One small problem with hydrogen fuel cell cars is they are a teensy weensy bit expensive."
Its because we lack the infrastructure and once we solve the thermodynamic uncertainties in containing hydrogen then it's a win win situation for all. Fuel Cells is the future.
In fact, battery electric vehicles are receiving less energy prices, because they are receiving government subsidizes. If no current government subsidizes for battery electric vehicles, then battery electric vehicles will use the almost same energy prices as gasoline combustion vehicles. I explain : governments apply very low prices of gasoline for gasoline electric generating stations, so you get the current low price for household electricity. Governments did not think that these low prices of electricity are used for cars too. But government apply very high prices of gasoline for gasoline filling stations. If people use more grid electricity for charging battery electric vehicles, then governments can rethink to apply the same gasoline prices for gasoline electric generating stations as the the gasoline prices for gasoline filling stations. So do not think that battery electric vehicles really use very low price of energy. now let's do a fair test for reality. You just try to buy retail gasoline to run your gasoline electric generators to charge your battery electric vehicles, then you will see the real true energy price for battery electric vehicles when without government subsidizes !
@@miyuden4118 yeah you are right that energy price of electric vehicles is low because of government subsidies. The question is that, where is cheap energy for electric vehicles ? Cheap energy is from coal, gases, oils, fossil fuels. It can not continue longer. i think that people will continue using battery vehicles parallely with hydrogen vehicles in the future, but hydrogen vehicles will be more 50%. When they produce more hydrogen from renewable energy, then the energy price of hydrogen cars will be cheap. Battery vehicles are necessarily for direct charging from renewable energy, but renewable energy is intermittent, so people need hydrogen cars. The energy price of electricity depends on time of day. It always nocomfortable to wait for charging, so it is forever reason for a lot of people to choose hydrogen cars. Besides, people live in apartments in cities, and they can not charge at homes. energy price of hydrogen cars now is nearly cheaper than energy price of gasoline cars. You see that a lot of people still prefer gasoline cars because they do not like the nocomfort of charging battery cars. So they will be pleasure to switch to hydrogen cars if there are enough hydrogen filling stations. Besides, the world is going to establish some popular global standard sizes of hydrogen balloons for vehicles, so that any warehouses can easily store standard sized hydrogen balloons for exchanging, and it will be motivation for more hydrogen cars. Believe me that hydrogen cars will be more 50% in near future when people produce a lot of hydrogen. VIP people and rich people will always choose hydrogen cars, but electric cars are necessarily for poor people
@@abstractexchange5057 Where you get energy from depends on where you live. And the energy price kWh is the same when I charge my phone, when I use my AC when I use my Water boiler. You get the point. I pay 0,1493 per kWh and my state gets it energy 60% from renewable. This is not due to subsidies for EV's. Cheap energy comes from solar, wind, water and battery peak stations. Did you ever see how incredible expensive a coal peak power station is and sometimes they got to fire up only for a few minutes to sustain the grid. Not quite managing because it takes long and and is inefficient to fire it up for peaks. A battery rig powered by solar can easily and rapidly manage peaks without extra costs. Of course some people yet cannot charge at home because they live in apartments without garage, the car is outside and so on. But imagine that changing with streetlights being added to the charging network. This is not a crazy idea, this already is happening. Imagine on every apartment building's roof and on every house a whole solar rig that poweres batteries which help to sustain the grid and also cheapen the energy cost for everyone. Solar panels are getting more advanced and batteries are getting more advanced. This is inevitable. I yet failed to see how every human being would be able to help contribute to a Hydrogen powered energy grid. Hydrogen is getting attraction to be innovated and researched mostly by companies who already are in power of oil and energy nowadays, because with Hydrogen they stay in Power because you won't be able to produce it yourself at home without doing anything. You would still need them, thats why it is attractive for these companies. And thats the reason why it does not make sense for normal persons like you and me to support that. The infrastructure for Hydrogen cars is so far behind and cannot catch up whatsoever. Because it is easier to charge a supercharger with solar or wind than it is to create the pressure needed for Hydrogen, let alone you have to create Hydrogen first and deliver it there, which is not as fast as energy. The grid for energy already stands. It just needs to switch from fossil fuels to sustainable energy.
"Tesla will have to increase range, while decreasing charging time and cost" Which is exactly what they've been doing consistently since the company started It's 2020 and they just bumped up the Model S to 390 miles of range The v3 superchargers are incredibly fast The production is going up, which like you said, leads to costs going down
Tesla probably won't stand a chance against hydrogen cars once the infrastructure and technology progress even a little. Well maybe they can but they are going to have to switch to hydrogen.
@@austinblackburn8095 yeah hydrogen cars are much better, also, considering the fact that the efficiency of batteries degrade over time. But hydrogen cars dont have the comfort of electric cars, since u can charge an electric car, anywhere that offers electricity, which are a lot of places, compared to hydrogen.
@@photonicsauce7729 hydrogen is plain stupid like Elon said. You use electricity to break down water and get h2 to then transport it and put into a car and use it to make electricity again? What's the point why not use use the electirct to power the car directly. Batteries are getting so much better at such a fast pace all the disadvantages will be gone in 5 years. Add in less maintenance, no oil changes, no expensive hydrogen, faster charging in future, free charging from solar on your house? Ev win easily. Also chargers are cheaper than installing hydrogen stations and hydrogen is pressurized which is very unsafe.
@@blastmaster7660 hydrogen is pressurised and unsafe lol. Then dont use a gas stove next time or a pressure cooker or dont live near a freaking city that has pressurised gas lines.
Wow. This video is a classic strawman argument. Focusing entirely on the few strengths of fuel cells while not mentioning the gigantic downsides. Bravo.
@@Orionnomad I don't know what conspiracy theories you have been reading and watching, but that's the stupidest thing I've heard since the outbreak of the coronavirus.
Lmao. That's not a strawman argument that would be providing a valid point against something but that something they are giving a valid point against is not true. Here is an example: A: We should relax the laws on beer. B: No, any society with unrestricted access to intoxicants loses its work ethic and goes only for immediate gratification. The original proposal was to relax laws on beer. Person B has misconstrued/misrepresented this proposal by responding to it as if it had been something like "(we should have) unrestricted access to intoxicants." It is a logical fallacy because Person A never advocated allowing said unrestricted access to intoxicants (this is also a slippery slope argument).
For sure - they also just skated past: A: The fact that most of the hydrogen comes from natural gas, with the carbon vented to atmosphere B: getting fuel cells to be cheap is not just a question of production volume, and has stumped humanity for decades C: It happens on airplanes that more fuel will eventually not produce more range, but in a car with regenerative braking, the battery would have to be absurdly big for this to happen (in fact, some people tow batteries behind their cars for increased range. An integrated battery would be even better).
And by the time, the time for the switch comes, e-fuels will be avialable as well. Their market readyness is higher because they can use the existing network of gas stations
This so called "documentary" is pure garbage. Many electric vehicles are already cheaper in terms of overall lifetime cost of ownership & virtually all are far more reliable than petrol burners. Hydrogen might eventually have some application for long range heavy fleet trucks, but it's far less practical for passenger vehicles than electric. I've done a hell of a lot of driving over the last 30 years in all manner of combustion cars. I still get good use out of my old manual transmission Matrix but nothing comes even remotely close to our Tesla Model 3. Because we do almost all charging at home it costs virtually nothing to run. The way it drives has completely spoiled my wife and I for anything else. Why worry about "finding a station" when you can charge at home? For road trips, charging stations are already almost everywhere.
@@drrobcwillis look,electric car has advantage for now,if i had to choose,of course electric car will be far better than hydrogen car,but maybe in the future,it will be a better alternative,when hydrogen car become cheaper and it's station is everywhere And i don't know about you,but i don't get electricity at home for free
@@daffs7166 - Mass producing hydrogen fueled vehicles could certainly bring down the cost of the individual cars, but that's not really the problem. The problem is that building out & maintaining a network of hydrogen fueling stations is orders of magnitude more expensive than building out a superfast electric charging network of the kind that has already been built & is growing exponentially. There is no technological way around those fundamental massive cost differences. There is also not way to get the costs of producing & transporting hydrogen down to anything close to that of gasoline, let alone electricity. The drastic losses of efficiency involved of using energy to manufacture hydrogen, move & store that hydrogen, then convert it back into electricity as opposed to using electricity to directly charge a battery are insurmountable, and almost as polluting as just burning petrol directly. Again, there are certain applications where the power/weight density advantages of hydrogen may make it a better choice than electric; such as in the case of long range transport aircraft. re. "And i don't know about you,but i don't get electricity at home for free" - No, I'm on the grid & my electricity is not free, but my crude guesstimation is that out it costs at least 10 times as much in terms of regular petrol to travel the same distance in my still ultra efficient manual transmission 2014 Toyota Matrix (I love that car!) as it does to travel the same difference in our far more luxurious 2021 Tesla 3SR+ if all charging is done at home. There are all kinds of far more detailed analysis of the comparative costs out there, so you don't have to take my word for it. I'll also guess that you do have electricity in your home, but you have access to even a single hydrogen fueling station where you work or live?
Okay, but will I get to refuel my car at my house? I love the fact I can charge while I am asleep and wake up to a full charge. Or charge for free at work on my 8 hour shift and leave for home with a full battery.
What if tesla added something which helps charge it as its driving? Like, collecting wind power while its driving or solar panels? Or like hybrid cars where the car charges itself. Not sure if it already has something like this but these improvements would help for long trips :)
@@cocoacoolness they could easily do that but the cost of the car would go up... There is a breaking point where people so to expensive of a car I'll pass
Business Insider: "An increase in range requires a larger battery" . Tesla: *Increases range through OTA update* Not to mention they have continually increased range while simultaneously decreasing the battery weight.
Plus, fuel cells are limited by tank size and batteries are limited by constantly improving chemistry - in ten years, FCVs will not go nearly as far as EVs
@@Rager_U yeah, and all with zero demonstration that fuel cells have actually improved at all outside of lab results. One time a lab claimed to have gotten power out of a cold fusion device, but I have yet to see that results repeated, let alone scaled up and deployed.
Didn't mention anything about: -Plug-in hybrids (high range, enough electric for daily EV, instant fueling with existing infrastructure) -Hydrogen cost -Infrastructure cost -Market effects -Engineering potential of batteries vs fuel cells -Maintenance cost -Performance limitations -Ecology of hydrogen cycle vs battery cycle I do hope The Algorithm brings this back in, say, 5-7 years. Edit: I have no problem with hydrogen, just the massive lack of analysis that this video gave. Hydrogen has great promise for commercial vehicles, huge potential for development, and it's infrastructure shouldn't be too huge a deal once petroleum starts to become less profitable, which is soon enough. Still don't think it can beat BEV for personal vehicles though.
Logan, also the maintenance should be about the same as an electric vehicle, or very low, tf you mean by market effects? Plug-in hybrids don't have instant fueling, info structure is literally gonna be a gas station with some hydrogen pumps as well, and this tech is so new we don't exactly know, besides that the excess fuel just becomes harmless water, e.g it doesn't matter
Metal hydrides are in development, I think Fuel cells have their own benefits and we shouldn't dismiss it outright. I for one am glad for any and all competition to gasoline.
@@EntropyConcept Agreed mostly. For plug-ins I meant you won't be held up significantly by running out of EV capacity; Road trips are doable an still more efficient than standard ICE. For infra, from what I understand, there's no rational way to combine a hydrogen system into an existing petroleum station without rebuilding the entire thing, so they would require new stations.
My biggest concern about BEVs is that they require a battery to run. Like most people on this planet I have been using battery-powered devices for years. And I hate the fact that batteries degrade over time until they become useless. Having a battery-powered car would mean that the car's max range will degrade over time, and that I would have to replace it at one point. This is not only upsetting for the car owner but also not really environmentally friendly.
Also, electric cars have actually been around since the late 1800's. If you research the history of EV's, you see that it took over a century to be a standard, affordable car with proper infrastructure in place. It's not 'if', it's 'when'.
@@samuelmontypython8381 I've been driving electric for a couple years now and it's honestly the best car I've ever had. Especially now, I get to charge it at home and not touch the COVID infected gas handles ;-)
WRONG. AGAIN. charging a tesla (motor club reviews by ACTUAL owners) is between 82% to 90% efficient depending on climate and rate of charge. NOW: hydrogen. by electrolysis, you lose 20% right off the top. plus the cost of distilled water. Liquifying the hydrogen so it can be stored & pumped into the car is around 15% energy loss. that's before the sellers & middlemen get their profit. that's before you have to do the maintenance on the equipment to generate, transport, chill and compress the hydrogen. so... 35% of your product is waste before you even start. and then big oil STILL controls the price, so don't expect that $8 a gallon price tag to go down anytime soon.
27... IF you use the natural gas to hydrogen 'cracking' method. but if you do that... what's the point? you'd be better off just burning the natural gas in your ice car.
I've always been a bit reticent to argue with a guy who builds rockets, sends them into space and then brings the tanks back and lands them up right - on a boat. He caught on to one thing when he started building electrics. You must have a charging network. So he built one. And how many people need more than 4 or 500 mile range a day? Now where do I go to get that hydrogen to fill up with again?
Hydrogen is manufactured using electricity at a massive loss of efficiency. There's a reason why Elon Musk says it's incredibly stupid to use hydrogen, because it is totally unsustainable and if everyone switched to hydrogen it would take 2-3 times more power than regular electric cars.
@@anson_phong hydrogen cars are environmentally sustainable whereas batteries I believe aren’t, I believe bio fuels are the best option, keep our cars, not great on the environment but there are counters
That's true.. it's not easy to built gas storages stations when compared to electric . I don't think people really care about whether it's electric ,hydrogen or focil fuel ,they just want power and convenient to use . So if there are more hydrogen stations then people will buy hydrogen vehicles .
+Maxadax "batteries have reached their ceiling" This is the dumbest statement that I've heard in a while. Tesla is about to roll out their new battery tech and many others are as well. You are badly misinformed.
Hydrogen fuel cell cars fit the system that we know today. Refuelling the petrol to full tank will not take 75 min. Electric cars are just the intermediated point between petrol and hydrogen fuel cars. Just like hybrid petrol cars that stand between the petrol cars and electric.
*Refueling* Hydrogen: Fast, but limited by moving physical matter through a pipe Electricity: Slow, but ultimately limited only by the speed of light. Graphene shows some promise in charging instantly, but the issue of discharging slowly needs to be resolved. Regardless there are constant improvements to current batteries. *Energy Production* Hydrogen: Needs electricity to break water into hydrogen and oxygen, guaranteed to lose some energy by laws of conversion. Something like fusion could make this loss practically irrelevant. Electricity: May be created sustainably in some cases with very high efficiency. The whole world is working on improving the tech. *Transportation* Hydrogen: Pressurized pipelines and trucks. Highly explosive but we managed relatively well with explosive gas. The pressurization is very costly though and about half the energy is lost here. Electricity: Instant delivery through cables which are needed regardless. Charge stations don't even need to store the fuel. This for me is the no-brainer argument for electric over hydrogen. *Energy density* Hydrogen: Very high, but requires an energy input far greater to create it than one get out of it. This can never reach 100% on earth since hydrogen is locked up in molecules. Batteries: High. Currently enough for cars but not most large aircraft. *Efficiency* (energy in to energy out) Fuel Cells: Very low. 20-60%. Including production, transportation and consumption, only a small amount of the initial energy results in propulsion of the vehicle. Batteries: Currently at 99% and could be increased in the trailing decimals. *Responsiveness* Hydrogen: Requires some startup time (few minutes) to start extracting full power. Batteries: Controlled by microchips but ultimately limited by the capacity of the motors and G-forces manageable for driver/passengers. List could go on with mechanical complexity, service life, noise levels etc but batteries usually come out on top. *Summary* Hydrogen is not a fuel, but a storage of energy, like batteries, but unlike the latter, need fuel cells to extract it. Does it make sense to use electrolysis to break out hydrogen from water just to later reverse it with a fuel cell? Perhaps for big commercial jets. Fuel cells are super cool but we need to strive for simplicity long term. Push for fuel cells to electrify the airliner fleets and move to batteries when density is high enough.
Batteries are some of the least energy dense things *there is* . *Literal garbage* has a higher energy density. Renewables are also so irregular that there's going to be massive spikes in electricity usage that need to be filled by a storage medium- and again, batteries are way more expensive than hydrogen (which is still expensive) due to the energy density problem (need more batteries to replace than fuel cells, even though both have a similar lifespan). Charging time is limited by battery degradation and endurance, not light (not to mention electricity doesn't travel through power lines at light speed- electricity is not composed of electrons, not photons, you know...) www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590116819300116
business insider: hydrogen fuel cell cars have higher range than battery electric cars also business insider: Tesla's cars have higher range than fuel cell cars but they are too expensive for the average consumer. business insider again: Fuel cell cars are more expensive than Tesla's cars. The reasoning of business insider is impeccable.
"Major automakers still see promise in hydrogen"? 😅 😂 🤣 Major automakers are hemorrhaging their market share to Tesla... They are the last people to listen to when it comes to the future of cars!
@@pastramisalsaandjelly8759 Yes hemorrhaging, lol, that is why VW, BMW and Mercedes are literally revamping their entire vehicle line up to be fully electric by 2030, all because of Tesla, Because 9% is do or die in a trillion dollar industry my friend.
@@c.s.n.7695 the metals used in the battery can be used in other appliances or new batteries. tesla are already working on gigafactory recycling plants
@@seankilburn7200 only some of the metals can be recycled... Metals deal with lots material degradation. It's also an extremely difficult process to recycle used batteries. I'd be interested to know what percentage of a used battery can actually be recycled. I just feel this whole idea behind EV vehicles that they're better because they're good for the environment and more sustainable is all "smoke and mirrors" as they say ha
So are you suggesting to spend electricity on creating a hydrogen from water, then transport it in near crygenic temperatures to a fuel station, then, again, produce electricity from it in your car? It's just a waste. Not to mention a cost of such fuel.
I was waiting for this point in the doc. The biggest challenge related to hydrogen cars is the cost of extracting hydrogen. However, the doc says, its lack of charging infrastructure, LMAO!
One thing that is not talked about is the first hydrogen car can charge I five minutes. The second hydrogen car has to wait 20 minutes or longer to fill up. Plus the hydrogen stations cost allot more to build than a EV charging station. Good luck buying a hydrogen car. No need to take notice at a failing technology.
I wonder if you've ever heard of moore's law? You should look it up. In the 1960s the most advanced computer cost millions of dollars. Today, your $100 Chinese made smartphone is 100x more advanced than the aforementioned computer of the 1960s.
@@jzk2020 Moore's law is about the number of transistors in a given area on a chip, in other words, it's about the physical density of processing ability. It's not applicable to any other technology. You're probably thinking about economy of scale.
@@jzk2020 Lmao if I had a nickel for every time someone brought up Moore's law in the most out of context situations just to sound smart, I would be rich. Everyone knows what Moore's Law is, and even that isn't grounded in science like actual theoretical "laws" are. It is literally just a guess at the future of progression, which is proving to not be accurate anymore at present. It has nothing to do with this. The cost prohibitive nature of the hydrogen cell lies in its infrastructure and production, not it's compactability??
@@beymaster923 According to Moores law, the top speed of cars should double every 18 months. The fastest road legal cars today can do about 250mph. So in 18 years we should have cars that can do a million miles per hour. The future is gonna be crazy.
In 2000 I read an article : " Hydrogen the fuel of the future" ... ten years later, in 2010 I read a similar article. Now, in 2020, the same idea comes back as a boomerang. Looking forward to year 2030 to hear again about the great future of hydrogen fuel ...
Water powered car is already invented in the Philippines more than 2 decades ago, but the corrupt Government didn't support it and they let the innovation/invention died. Most of the Filipinos who are aged 30+ knows this.
@@roiferreach100 No, I'm sorry. Water is highly stable, therefore requires more energy input to receive energy output. Look at sources of energy: gasoline, diesel, kerosene - mercy, even a rubber band wound up to power a toy car! - they are all unstable and volatile because they are a chain reaction waiting to happen. Water is the opposite. This is why you throw water on a fire and not gasoline. There can never be any chemical reaction by which water produces energy - it is as immutable as the laws of physics
@@ieditedmyname289 This article is from 1997, announcing that hydrogen fuell cell has finally arrived: They say, I quote" After decades of unfulfilled promise, fuel cell momentum is now so great that its emergence as a predominant technology appears just short of inevitable." www.wired.com/1997/10/hydrogen-3/
The best use case is for trucks and semis. For cars, we do not yet have a dedicated infrastructure, but trucks usually stick along specific highways, and can have large tanks to store sufficient fuel for round trip.
Yes, except for long trips, I always charge at home. Also, they claim it takes well over an hour to supercharge from 0 to 100%. Who drains the battery down to zero and then charges all the way up to 100%??
@@kenbob1071 quite true :). saw a study not too long ago that showed upwards to about 80+% of electric car owners never once charge at public charging stations and thus only at home. so obviously that works. also as i understood teslas.. you should charge it to about 80% if on the road and then leave it unless you have time as the last 20% takes longer. i dont recall why but makes some sense i spose :).. But people whining about range.. i mean.. if you drive 300+ miles a day.. i guess you should look at your options before buying a vehicle.. but i also question why youre driving that distance.. as for "road trips" .. the vast majprituy of people never once in their life goes on one, nor leave their city of residence , by car atleast.
@@ndaemon1718 Yes, it's easier on the battery to slow down the charge rate when it approaches a higher state of charge. That's why I never charge to 100%. I took a 2,500 mile road trip last Fall and never had any problems. Charging was quite quick and a welcome break after driving. Since then I've just plugged it in at home and wake up to a full "tank." Nice!!
And 10x more than battery electric. At 30¢/mi for H2 ($17/kg) vs 3¢/mi for electric (14¢/kWh), Hydrogen has a really long way to go to even start to threaten anything.
@@skiran69 It doesn't matter the volume, you still lose 50% of the stored electrical energy breaking the H2O bond and compressing the gas. Then you also lose 50% of the energy combining it back into H2O making electricity in the FC. You are left with 25% of the original electric you started with to drive the wheels. You can argue that we can make that a few percent better, but certainly not exponentially. The only production volume increase you can make to decrease the cost significantly is to continue to make H2 from natural gas and drill and frack more as they do now releasing the CO2 byproduct into the atmosphere. You might as well just burn the natural gas if you continue doing that instead of hiding it behind the name hydrogen.
@@scottkolaya2110 who the hell said that electrolysis of water is the only way to produce hydrogen. Recently Iranian scientists found a way to mass produce hydrogen using waste generated from cities.
I feel like 20 years ago people had the same argument and we went almost nowhere in that time for Fuel Cell other than they don’t cost 250k anymore. This video seems to be a very biased argument against BEV that currently get more mileage than 99% of people need in a given day. However, I do get the range argument if you cannot add a charging station at your home.
He mentioned many drawbacks for BEV but not many for hydrogen. There are actually many problems with hydrogen tech and it is not just the low economics of scale that is causing the prices to be high.
Scientists have discovered a way to make cheap catalysts recently. They are normally made out of expensive metals like platinum which keep the cost high. I follow hydrogen news quite devotedly. The biggest danger for hydrogen is that it hurts other subsidized energy who desperately want to keep their guaranteed income.
The promise major automakers and the oil industry see, is that hydrogen is mostly created through petroleum products so they're essentially keeping the same business model going.
Mandolatron : yes, plus maintenance of such vehicles is very special, and fueling is ONLY at the stations. Free yourself - get BEV and charge at home, at work, at most campgrounds ⛺️ , anywhere where electricity is. Speed of fueling doesn’t matter in such. And this is 95% of the cases.
Peter Wu : rule of thumb - 4 miles per kW. So approximately 7.5kW for 30 miles. If using grid electricity which is 9 cents in winter or 11 cents in summer drive 30 miles would cost from $0.65 to $0.83. But I also installed solar panels. So my electricity cost me btw 2.9 to 3.5 cents per kW (Taking into account amortization of the system). So in my case driving 30 miles cost me around $0.25. 😜
1. What about the price of the energy source? Hydrogen costs 5 times than electricity! 2. You can recharge your Tesla in your garage and never visit an EV station, but you can't store hydrogen in your garage..
Sad this video has no scientific data to back the claims. Only stating the economy of scale principles. Ignoring the huge engery wasted when producing hydrogen.
Because they are not financially and/or technologically capable of investing in the next-next generation of personal mobility. BEVs can't replace all mobility. FCEV can replace what BEVs can't.
@@fakeis200300 without a fueling network hydrogen has zero potential to go cross country. And why would trillions of dollars of fueling infrastructure be maintained for a very small number of drivers? That would be so economically inefficant. The fuel stations will all shut down the instant government isn't sibisidizing the majority of the cost.
What a "mind bogglingly" under researched video. Go ahead and watch Real Engineering's video on the same topic. He's explained this topic in great detail and why Fuel Cell EVs won't be a thing
In my opinion hydrogen is the solution for planes and ships as you need only localized fueling and super high range with efficiënt refueling. Therefore using the technology in cars to somewhat offset the cost is logical. In the case of cars I think it's more future proof to invest in battery technology. Consumers use lots of small devices with batteries in them, so a joint venture aimed on Consumers in batteries is a much more logical choice. In addition the fueling Networks as mentioned in the video.
@@mauritsbrood5778 So when I plan a trip with my family. I will have to wait like 5-6 hours in midway for charging? Doesn't really make sense. Plus world doesn't even produce enough electricity to power both their homes and cars. Additionally, renewable resources like sun and wind-based power plants are not efficient. Eco-firendly Solution: Share the load, keep electricity related stuff to basic home and office needs, mobile phones and tablets and the transportation load to Hydrogen.
@@AmritZoad Let's park (see what I did there😁) the case about the quick improvement of both charge technology and range of BEV's currently. I wasn't saying you can't or shouldn't be able to, just that in my opinion it is Impractical due to the way hydrogen fueling currently works and the lack of Network. But if that offsets the problem of range for someone they absolutely should take a fuel cell car. Maybe a car with both a fuel cell and a battery cell is even possible. But for the majority of trips a BEV seems more practical under current conditions. Considering the power Supply problem, to make hydrogen you need electricity as well right? Therefore you will lose power to heat by both producing hydrogen and converting it back to electricity which will always be less efficiënt. Even if this wasn't the case a big hydrogen to electricity plant would be more efficient than small hydrogen engines in cars so using that and BEV's would probably be more efficient still.
Drake Nel , not triggered. Just pointing out that the video is giving misleading information about electric cars-specifically Tesla-which I own because I’ve done lots of research.
Drake Nel , also, hydrogen isn’t the future. They’ve been trying to do it for a long time. They can’t scale it to make it affordable the way that electric cars are scaling. It’s not just the cost to manufacture, hydrogen is more expensive due to transport. It’s tough to walk more than a few yards without being around electricity. Even IF the cost of hydrogen could be cheaper than electric, people have already tasted the performance of EVs.
Hydrogen explodes dramatically. "Just water" water vapor is the most abundant greenhouse gas, idk if fcev would damage the eviroment tho. A big argument is range, i dont have a tesla but from what I know people just plug in at night and have range for the whole day np.
Why don't you guys honestly say that this video is sponsored by "ANTI-EV MANUFACTURERS"........ Or By "PRO HYDROGEN FUELED VEHICLE MANUFACTURERS " ......
In fact, battery electric vehicles are receiving less energy prices, because they are receiving government subsidizes. If no current government subsidizes for battery electric vehicles, then battery electric vehicles will use the almost same energy prices as gasoline combustion vehicles. I explain : governments apply very low prices of gasoline for gasoline electric generating stations, so you get the current low price for household electricity. Governments did not think that these low prices of electricity are used for cars too. But government apply very high prices of gasoline for gasoline filling stations. If people use more grid electricity for charging battery electric vehicles, then governments can rethink to apply the same gasoline prices for gasoline electric generating stations as the the gasoline prices for gasoline filling stations. So do not think that battery electric vehicles really use very low price of energy. now let's do a fair test for reality. You just try to buy retail gasoline to run your gasoline electric generators to charge your battery electric vehicles, then you will see the real true energy price for battery electric vehicles when without government subsidizes !
@@mattc7939 I know, people get energy in USA from coal, gases, nuclear energy, and emerging renewable energy. So the situation is worse for climate. If we do not need to care about climate, then people can forget hydrogen and hydrogen vehicles. The speech about hydrogen and hydrogen vehicles emerges only in our renewable energy era. And I can guarantee you that, hydrogen passenger vehicles will be popular more 50% of all future passenger vehicles. The main reason is not only in the hydrogen vehicles. The main reason is that people need to use hydrogen to store renewable energy. Renewable energy is intermittent, nuclear energy is intermittent (you can not continuously vary power of nuclear energy station), and energy itself is volatile too. But only energy carrier is stable. We have natural energy carrier, which is coal, oil, gases, but unfortunately we can not continue to use more these natural energy carriers. So we must synthesize our artificial energy carrier, which is hydrogen. It is a forever problem of no synchronizing energy supply and energy demand. All scientist and experts confirmed that it is necessary to decouple energy harnessing and energy demand, because of the forever problem of no synchronizing energy supply and energy demand. It means that people must convert renewable energy into hydrogen, parallely with direct using renewable energy. It means that people must and will produce a lot of hydrogen in the future to solve the forever problem of no synchronizing energy supply and energy demand. With a lot of hydrogen in the future, it will be profitable to use hydrogen directly in hydrogen vehicles. Electric vehicles will be used to get direct energy from renewable source too, but as you see that you can not always get direct energy from renewable source at any time of day or years. So hydrogen vehicles will fulfill this very big gap. Just remember my sentences, in near future when people will produce a lot of hydrogen, you will see that passenger hydrogen vehicles will be popular more than 50 %. It is logical truth strategy view. I can give you one example about this view. In the past time, people always said that it is profitable to use only fresh food, and it is not profitable to use industrial food. Because need to pack and utilize fresh food to make industrial food, so need extra fee for these intermediate process of packing and utilizing fresh food. But now, you can see that people eat fresh food and industrial food parellely. People now even eat industrial food more than fresh food. And once again here, the reason is the forever problem of no synchronizing of supply and demand. Fresh food is direct energy from renewable source, while industrial food is hydrogen. The same situation will happen, that people will use parallely battery electric vehicles and hydrogen vehicles, but when people use more renewable energy, they must produce more hydrogen, and we will see that hydrogen vehicles are more than 50%.
Hydrogen cars are inherently electric cars (they don't burn hydrogen like gas cars!) so good hydrogen vehicle is actually a good electric vehicle. Hyundai already has a fleet of (normal) EVs, and their efficiency is the closest to Tesla than any other old car makers. Toyota isn't very well known in the EV segment, but it is the king of hybrid cars. Saying hydrogen car manufacturers are anti-EV for some reason is uninformed argument and simply isn't true.
What the video doesnt tell you, its incredibly expensive to open hydrogen fuel stations and those stations can only fuel a few vehicles an hour because they need to maintain pressure. It makes more sense to use electric since the infrastructure is already in place. Business insider is just trying to create some propaganda for the legacy auto manufacturers. Electric already won, just look at Model 3 sales. Jesus... this video is making an assumption that there will be no breakthroughs with battery technology increasing their range. And complains about electric costs when its super cheap to own an electric after its initial purchase unlike hydrogen cars. F this video.
It certainly is, although batteries and their charging stations used to be more expensive too. The other big problem with Tesla you don't seem to know is, that the production of each vehicle is more than twice as polluting than the manufacturing of a car with a combustion engine, and the materials needed for their batteries, especially lithium are also in limited supply. Hydrogen does not face that challenge.
OMG I’ve never seen such a partial video! It brings up all hydrogen strongpoints and battery weak points but COMPLETELY ignores hydrogen weak points. It does bring up that Elon has called them stupid, but does not tell you anything about why he says that! WHY?! Why does Business Insider create a pure propaganda video for hydrogen?! For reference watch Real Engineerings video on the matter which is unbiased as things should be!
"While some teslas have more range, they also cost more than the average buyer is able to afford", *shows pic of model 3*. Yeah defently not meant for average buyer.
Its hilarious when you compare a tesla model 3 to a hydrogen car like the Mirai. The tesla is cheaper, has a longer range, is 10x+ less expensive to charge, has double the power and you can charge it at home.
This video was maybe believable back in 2012 when Tesla was just starting out with $60K-$150K models with just 265 miles of max range and just a handful of supercharger stations. It’s 2020 and EVs now have close to 400 miles of range with 500-600 within the next year or two. And there’s also 100x more charging options worldwide and exponentially increasing. Charging 200 miles of range also went from one hour to just 30 minutes and getting faster. Soon I won’t even have time to take a piss before my car app tells me it’s done charging. There’s even more public places and business that offer charging while you work, eat, play, and sleep at their locations. Can’t do that with HFC vehicles anytime soon or ever. And where’s HFC today in comparison to all this? It’s been the fuel of the future since the 70s and was heavily supported back in the early 2000s. Yet it’s literally almost in the same state of limbo now as it was back then. I was a Toyota fan and was really interested in HFC before I became a full BEV fan. After doing my own exhaustive research, I was convinced that FCV is just a bait and switch product by Big oil and everyone entrenched in oil and ICEV industry. I continue to keep an eye out for any big developments in HFCV, but it’s inherently reliant on advancements in two things in order to improve: Battery and the energy source used for production. Which is basically saying HFCV tech will improve when BEVs do.
@@heyimgayalso6129 well first, the charge time may be fast, but after a charge, it takes the pump over half an hour to recalibrate. That's half an hour of down time where no one cane charge at all.
@@heyimgayalso6129 You have to make hydrogen using guess what, Electricity. Hyddrogen is also very hard to contain even in a completley closed container and it will leak out fast, if you left it in your driveway for a week your fuel tank would be empty. Also hydrogen is very dangerous, puncture a hydrogen tank and it will explode with a violent force that will rip you appart and depending on the amount of fuel also half the roadway. Gasoline burns, Batteries burn with toxic fumes and hydrogen explodes, would you rather have a chance of survival or die instantly? Also there are other problems with hydrogen others have pointed out...
@@heyimgayalso6129 It takes massive energy use to separate hydrogen from oxygen only to put it back together. It is useful for some types of applications, but it needs to be cryogenically stored to maintain a weight economy to be of use. You have to store it in high pressure containers for any other application, and by that point you have an invisible gas that needs high pressure systems to move and divide. It isn't like gasoline that you can pour into a bucket and back into a fuel tank. It is hard to use. At this point there are fuel cells that can take light alcohols like methanol. liquid alcohols are easily pumped, don't require pressure vessels, can be put in buckets and poured into tanks, and are clean to burn just like hydrogen. Light alcohol fuel cells will be the future fuel of choice for extending the range of electric vehicles.
@@bimbo1384 they store Hydrogen as Ammonia not as a pure Hydrogen gas. Nitrogen atom will hold multiple Hydrogen together and can be released later. Ammonia is very storable, we have huge industries producing Ammonia to feed crops as fertilisers. Our production capacity for Ammonia is quite high, we can distribute Ammonia very easily if needed.
Okay, some missed points: - Can you fuel your hydrogen car at home in the garage? (No) - How many hydrogen cars a hydrogen station port can serve in a hour including the re-pressurization between fueling? (Its about 4 afaik, which is on par or below a supercharger port) - How much such a station cost compared to a supercharger location? - Total efficiency chain of hydrogen creation -> fueling -> fuel cell electricity generation VS BEV charging into battery + cable cooling -> withdrawing electricity form battery? - If the answer to the previous was not "hydrogen is terrible less efficient than BEV charging", then what environmentally destructive method was used to create hydrogen instead of electrolysis, and with what byproducts. - Given that hydrogen stations and cars have to store the universes smallest molecule at extreme pressures, has the issue of lasting and safe sealing of the storage solved yet? - Given that so much more Tesla supercharger exists than hydrogen fuel station, which of the two had how many violent explosions so far? There is not a single reason for this tech not spreading, there are many.
@@chrismuir8403 true.. Why build a network of hydrogen stations. When you can adapt your house to charge your car. Actually a regular 110 wall outlet will do in a pinch.
@@chanceDdog2009 Why adapt your house and 30k for a car to wait hours to recharge, when you can just buy a second hand I4 equiped gas car for less than 1k? more than that, a golf or a corolla are pretty cheap to refuel as they have quite good millage, and there's no infrastucture problem, take a jerry can with you just in case.
It’s gonna be a war, but not that big one. Last year over 2 million electric cars are sold, while less than 50,000 hydrogen cars were sold. The reason why electric cars are being sold more, because they are faster or luxurious more tech focus and they cost less. You also have a lot more places to charge electric car and you just can charge it home with 99% of the time works, if you have one
@@capitaohectorbarbossa9172 because Teslas are the fastest sedans, cooler, and in five years, and a Tesla model 3 Standard range plus cost the same to own as a 25k Toyota Camry. Besides not everyone wants a boring Toyota, and we are giving the choice, and could afford it they would choose tesla most likely
Hydrogen might work for container ships or airplanes, since their energy use is beyond what current batteries can provide and also they operate out of ports their infrastructure could be more centralized
Yeah, good use case. I think big ships could be a real deal here, electric flight will be here in five years. There is some power issues, though... Fuel cells are not really good at creating a lot.
@@SalivatingSteve I agree with you that a hydrogen container ship would cost more. Overtime the cost could come down a bit but I'm not sure if it would ever be cheaper. With that said it could still be worth doing, considering the amount of pollution these ships put out
Someone needs to watch more @Bjørn Nyland He had a couple of pretty detailed videos about hydrogen tech. To sum up the basics - it's never going to happen!
It seems as if you have completely ignored the benefits outlined in this video. I have just watched Nyland's video and he hasn't highlighted any significant issues with Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars. The issues outlined were: - Water emitted goes onto the road. Which I guess in colder climates could be dangerous but is an infrastructure problem - Can't Re-fuel at home like he could with his Tesla - EV's are cheaper - Fuel Cell life span - Hydrogen Fuel cell cars are expensive - Infrastructure All of these issues can be solved once people realise the EV's they are buying to save the planet actually powered by a national grid that uses fossil fuels. The only thing stopping Hydrogen Fuel cell cars is infrastructure and that's. Once fuelling stations are built, this will drive manufactures to build in larger numbers and therefore reducing costs and ironing out imperfections associated with the power train. Be open to new technologies.
@@highland96 I have no problem with new tech. But hydrogen fuel cell technology is something like fusion. It's always the tech of the future and it's always about 20 years away. And no one mentioned how much money is being invested in each technology. EV's currently pull hundreds of billions in investment - how much is being invested into fuel cells? This quite clearly points into rate of innovation. If fuel cells ever become a mainstream choice - all the better for us consumers. The entire point of this exercise is for ICE vehicles to become the alternative not the mainstream they are today. We need to boost our efficiencies and move to a sustainable energy sources.
Honestly, I prefer Battery Electric Cars. Why? Simply because I can charge it in my own home at my own sweet time. With hydrogen, you CANNOT !!!! So it is back to square one, as with gasoline as you will be at the mercy of the gasoline producers.
@@Hypertyz Yes, what about electricity producers? eh? What about? We all know that every house is with electric supply unless you live in cave. Do you live in a cave.? So with electrical supply, you charge your EV anytime but NO house in the world, is with a gasoline pump.
And lets not forget when you buy that hydrogen at a fuel pump it would have been made by burning fossil fuel with worse EROEI than using it in the car to begin with
And tell me, how do we people get the majority of the El. energy that supplies the world? When you get the answer maybe u will reconsider your statement bcs even with ur "sweet home charging" u still at the mercy not only of gas corporations but also of el. providers in your state.
It is indeed paid content as before the hydrogen even gets into your vehicle, it is subject to a ton of loss in efficiency and after that, all that hydrogen needs to be converted into electricity to mechanical energy, further losing energy.
i see a bright future for Hydrogen in heavy Vehicles like Trucks, Ferries and Ships and even in Aviatiion than for Battery Electric Vehicles. I hope the cost for Fuel Cells come down and they have some alternates for Platinums used in the Fuel Cell stacks. As far as H2 is concerned, we alreayd have use cases where Green H2 can be made for less than $3 /kg. and it is only going to improve.
Tesla is one of the worst in terms of reliability and maintenance though. Their price drops like a rock after a few years, no one wants them after all. I wouldn’t bet against Toyota.
Man is that really your argument? You really need to go look at the common causes of ICE vehicles then... You’re going to be heart broken to find out you just walked right up their alley.
@@Texarmageddon Except the eletrical malfunctions of traditional ICE cars are due to the moronic and archaic way in which they design those electrical systems, which Tesla has already solved by simplifying them. ICE vehicles are more unreliable than EV's, and that's a fact
Some good info but you forgot one important comparison, refuel cost! Driving a EV I get enough charge driving locally everyday without needing to refill.
I could see some sort of “hybrid” fuel cell being the future. You plug-in and charge off a ‘small’ (compared to BEVs) battery that runs in the car kind of like a plug-in hybrid, but for longer drives you go to the hydrogen station. It’s a win-win. Like that is my dream car, now can it not be ugly?
I was under the impression that hydrogen was inefficient to produce then I viewed some videos on a new science that is basically self generating hydrogen - and not through renewable energies. Sounds weird but when you see some of their validation demonstrating vid’s, you will see what this means. Type H2IL into youtube - it's truely game changing to say the least...
Fuel cell cars are the future. The electric cars are just the “cool things” of the moment. Everybody is talking about them and that’s why automakers makes them. As I said fuel cell cars are the future
@@HeresTheGenZFlorentineFolks. fuel cells are very unefficent and makes us lose total energy but i guess they could take a %1 place. People who has a lot of money to spend and don't like waiting for charging can but it but in general it is just too unefficant to take a big place
@@fallendown8828 no, Bro... you don’t understand... now, can u imagine an aircraft with batteries? You know what’s the matter? The weight! And here come the Hydrogen
2:10 "Hydrogen cars seem to come out on top again" Toyota Mirai: 312 miles at a cost of $59,455 Tesla Model 3: 322 miles at a cost of $40,815 The Tesla Model 3 has slightly higher range, despite the Mirai costing roughly 50% more... Also worth mentioning - you can charge the Tesla Model 3 at your house. You can't refill the Mirai with Hydrogen the same way
10-20 years from now, I’d still choose hydrogen. The point of both electric and hydrogen is to lower emissions yes? I just think hydrogen is more convenient for an everyday drive. Don’t really feel like sitting on my ass for 5 hours when charging a vehicle. I sound stupid yes, do correct me zoomers
Yeah, I can just see those 2 million dollars each hydrogen filling stations popping up everywhere. Not to mention that I can charge a BEV overnight almost for free.
Ryan Roussel It’s still less emissions than If you just burned petrol straight from your car. Also the grid can be cleaned up with renewable resources. Hydrogen most likely will always release emissions through methane cracking because electrolysis is so inefficient.
@INNOCENT SCIENCE but if solar panels get better then it can provide a little bit of charge in case of emergency Or can charge the battery if you're out camping
Like they did for the combustion engine car and the electric car 100 years ago. Look at how that turned out. One mobilised billions, and the other is mobilising millions on the back of fossil fuels.
Hydrogen costs about $5.6 a gallon equivalent. Electricity is much cheaper, and you can charge over night in your garage, which makes it more convenient. Can’t do that with hydrogen or gas.
@@kenbob1071 This is actually the first I've ever even heard of this tech. It looks really cool but this video is getting alot of hate. What's wrong with hydrogen cars?
If you are looking for science the last place you want to look is in a publication called business insider. These jerks can’t even do banking without ruining The economy, why should we trust them with science. Business majors are the stupidest people I ever met in college except for athletes. Often they were one in this same. “ teamwork boys, come on boys, we got a beat the competition, hydrogen is everywhere, let’s go get it, we’re gonna show those engineers.“ A freaking joke of A publication, business insider. Look at how many negative thumbs down they got, tells you everything, because this is not political, this is about Luddites versus science.
Hydrogen is the future fuel, when everyone has its own aircraft, you want lightless, batteries is shit for that, I what flying cars, why Elon Musk with his Mars exploration, I want to see a flying Tesla car.
Tesla already has a solution for charging time and range. Version 3 super chargers are rolling out. A 5 minute charge recuperates 75 Miles. In the next couple years Tesla’s are going to have a range of 500+
This video is actually pretty embarrassing for them. Even research papers by the hydrogen council (biggest hydrogen lobby group) don't see hydrogen playing a significant role for consumer automobiles. It's like they decided to just ignore all the science.
Another key factor when chooshing EV over Fuel cell is vehicle maintenance, as fewer parts reduce both replacement cost and likelihood of failure which saves money in the long run.
Honestly, people speak so high and mighty about how hydrogen cars vehicles will takeover Electric cars.
We should be speaking more about how hydrogen fueled cars should be replacing Gas fueled cars.
We should stop talking about hydrogen cars. It will cost you twice in fuel costs and be worse for the environment. Hydrogen cars are stupid.
Edit: Yes I know that the actual chemical reaction makes water. My point is that the process of making, transporting, and storing hydrogen is inefficient.
a car that gets stuck for hours everytime it needs to be refueled is alot more 'stupid' than a car that can be refueled in minutes.. point is consumers do not like battery powered cars, massive subsidies and still no one wants them, they are less than 1% of sales and they have limitations the ICE cars they are supposed to replace do not have. inferior technology never overtakes superior tech and fossil fueled ICE cars will always be superior to battery powered cars.. their refueling stations will always be everywhere and they will always take just minutes to give you another 600km and more electric than you need.
@@samk2266 You clearly know almost nothing about electric cars. While electric cars may seem inferior now, they will be the obvious choice in the future. For likely 95% of people, they will not drive much more than 30 miles a day and they will most likely not go on a road trip super often. Most electric car owners never have to worry about charging their car. They can do it at home. And it's cheap. Electric cars also have better performance especially at similar price points to ICE cars. Battery technology is advancing fast. I would'nt be surprised if in 5 years we have a battery that can charge twice as fast, or goes twice the distance. Electric motors also open up many new options for software, like fully autonomous driving. ICE engines are fairly unreactive compared to electric engines, you can not fit as many features into a gasoline engine as an electric one. Frankly, the only problem with electric cars is that they take a while to charge. This is really only a problem on road trips, the vast majority of people will rarely ever care, and most people will count waiting an extra hour a few times a year worth it for having a car that can 1. accelerate faster 2. saves money and 3. drives itself. I totally understand that an electric car may not be the right choice for you, but it is extremely obvious that EVs will only get more popular.
@@samk2266 I never ever get "stuck for hours" recharging my EV. I recharge it at home, mostly from home-made solar power, or at a destination charger (hotel) while I sleep or do business. I spent a total of 2.5 hours over the course of 2019 at supercharger stations while on longer trips. This compares to spending 6-10 hours per year in total filling an ICE car at a gas station.
One more thing you seem not to know, Sam: while it may take 5 mn to fuel a hydrogen car, the hydrogen tank of the fueling station then needs to be recompressed, and that takes quite some time. So, a single hydrogen station can refuel only a few (3-5) cars per hour, and costs around a million! How much does a wall outlet cost for overnight charging of a BEV?
Ruzz Craze it’s not like batteries are already incredibly polluting and are finite in size, solid state batteries will be insanely expensive
Nuclear cars seem much better
Pshhh... everyone knows Flux capacitor is the future
lol we be seeing meltdowns in a crash due to cooling system fail
They use it in military subs so why not in PV’s as well :)))))
@@swedishpopo9410 because ocean = unlimited cooling lol = no melt down
No, what about wind energy cars?
p.s. this is a joke.
0:17 "the most abundant resource in the universe"
Irrelevant. We are on earth. On earth it can only be found naturally, tied to atoms like carbon, oxygen and nitrogen. It takes energy to extract the hydrogen.
Yea, that argument is like saying a gas car can run on living dinosaurs or an EV can run on lightning bolts.
Extracted by electricity then regenerates electricity😉 risk energy loss in the process which is just dumb
If only there were a place where we could find both water and renewable energy.
(the ocean waves from the back)
I guess wave got our hands tide.
Ok dwight
I miss the part where they explain the economics of hydrogen (energy efficiency in relation to the costs)
Business insider is being biased
Well, consumers aren't always after the efficiency. If they were ICE engines wouldn't have taken off in the first place. When it comes to mass produced consumer vehicles the determining factors are convenience and cost (Overall).
@@rammani7170 convenience and cost? Hydrogen has neither
Hydrogen car: using electricity to produce hydrogen and then use hydrogen to generate electricity
Me: we’ll make sense to replace EV🤷♀️
This video is an advertising lie!
They don't lie about what they say.
What is lied about is what is not said.
It is lying when you deliberately conceal or belittle important facts.
Looks like someone is paying people to talk about the hydrogen cars again, theyve been showing up a lot lately, and its still a stupid idea.
@Sonymnms 52 No... Hydrogen for cars is not a viable option economically either now or in future for Hydrolysis is very costly, and can not be refined further.So, no matter what we do, Hydrogen will always be 8 to 9 times more costlier than gasoline. Also, because it is most combustible and require more maintenance/care during transportation and storage which adds to the cost. Unlike charging stations(Wayyyyy cheaper) or even gas stations(installation cost $10k to $20k), Hydrogen fueling station setup costs a fortune(Millions). And home charging is an option that I don't think HEVs can beat.
Sonymnms 52 There are way more arguments than only the lack of infrastructure.
- combustion engines and the drivetrains lose way more energy to heat, friction and gearing compared to an electric car. Therefore cars with an electric drivetrains are more efficiënt.
- Using green energy to turn water into hydrogen with electrolysis is an inefficient process that costs way more energy compared to charging the car directly. And to make enough hydrogen for everyone you need an impossibly big factory.
-Hydrogen is instable and highly explosive and needs to be stored in special pressurised tanks. Refueling on a large scale will he problematic and dangerous without proper safetymeasures, a problem an alectric car doesnt have. You can also charge an electric car at home.
- Transporting hydrogen with a truck to a gasstation is less efficiënt than charging a car through the powergrid.
Im a petrolhead, i ride a motorcycle and love classic cars, but the sad truth is the combustion engine isnt going to survive. The battery capacity and technology are improving rapidly and many car manufacturers are switching to electric and are also investing in the chargingstation infrastructure, I just don’t see where the hydrogen car fits in.
@Sonymnms 52, no, FCEVs are a dumb idea, first and foremost, because the technology results in crappy cars. Do you want to pay $57,000 for a four seat heavy midsize sedan with poor handling, limited cargo space, and a 0-60 of 9 seconds that has very limited refueling options, or would you rather spend the same money on the Model 3 Performance instead of the Mirai, seat five, have good cargo space, great handling, and get to 60 in just 3.2 seconds while mostly recharging in your garage?
The infrastructure will NEVER be built, because new technologies that are inferior in every way, like FCEV is, never get adopted. Even comparing the Mirai with the Prius, the Prius wins every single category and costs half as much, pollutes less, and can fuel just as fast but at 12,500 California locations instead of just 25.
No amount of dishonesty will convince buyers to spend luxury car money for economy car specs. Not happening.
Sonymnms 52 they can be, there are 2 types of hydrogen powered cars...
Hydrogen Fuel cell and hydrogen combustion engine.
Hydrogen fuell cells only have a max of 50% efficiency...so it only makes sense as a range extender..
And in both cases you still have most of the problems I mentioned earlier..
@Sonymnms 52 it is an electric vehicle that costs 5 times as much to fill up, is slow, with an expensive fuel cell, and has a huge round pressurized hydrogen tank instead of a flat or space-conforming battery pack. And you can't plug the damn thing up anywhere. The efficiency of a hybrid for twice the price and none of the convenience. Brilliant.
No charging at home, very high maintenance, high costs and hugely expensive and explosive compressing stations that can only fill a handfull of cars per day. Plus hydogen that's made fom methane and has to be transported by truck. Congrats!
eat - Many think that hydrogen is prepared by electrolysis of water. It can be, but it is enormously energy consuming. And something has to be done with the oxygen besides releasing it, or the portion of the energy used that is represented by the separation of the oxygen is wasted.
Hydrogen's pluses are that its only combustion product is water. That is unless the compression ratio is high enough to produce nitrogen oxides, which are pernicious smog irritants. If the compression ratio is lower, efficiency is lost.
If hydrogen escapes, it goes up, which is safer than gasoline and propane.
When hydrogen is extracted from methane, what is done with the carbon? What energy source separates the hydrogen from the carbon without letting it burn?
@Sonymnms 52 You do not seem to understand that the vast majority of people can charge enough at home while they sleep to cover all of their daily driving and then some. "No one cares" should actually say "most people care". Do you actually look forward to going to the gas station? Do you know anyone that smiles when they realize they are forced to go fill up with gas because they love it so much? It's a chore. It's one we are used to, but it is a chore none the less. You can literally eliminate the need to go to any kind of gas station for your day to day driving and somehow you think people WANT to keep that in their lives? And road trips account for less than 5% of most people's driving so I wouldn't buy a car with extra inconvenience 95% of the time just to make it a little more convenient 5% of the time.
David fuel is very bad but battery isn’t perfect it’s no renewable just like gas it takes a lot of energy to extract the metals from the ground and China controls all of the production and you have to replace you’re battery in 5 years gas isn’t the solution but neither is battery
@@neilmurphy6136 Solar energy costs between 2 and 4 cents a kWh and if you charge your car directly from solar, you have very little transmission losses compared to the grid or hydrogen on trucks.
@@neilmurphy6136 Replacing the battery in 5 years? absolutely not true, we are not talking about phone batteries that loose a significant amount of power over 2-5 years but about massive batteries that last way longer, just the Nissan Leaf battery alone is designed to last at least 10 years in the car and then many more as stationary power source. Tesla probably would not give you a 8 year warrany on your battery if you would have to replace it every 5 years.
Hydrogen Station in Oslo can only refuel about 15 cars then the pressure drops drastically. And it cost 4 million dollars to build. Only someone on Colombia diet will support hydrogen for personal transport.
The same station that blew up in June 2019? Fool cells are doomed, just like Saudi Arabia.
Yeah, I think we have a hydrogen future, but not for personal transport. Hydrogen planes and trains might make more sense
Ou8y2k2 WAT 😱
Ou8y2k2 why was this nowhere in the news? At least not in my country. When a Tesla catches fire after an accident they report about it for at least a month.
@@17R3W Trains can be also powered by the cables above or the third rail, and they already have been for a long time in many places.
Why does everyone love to hate hydrogen. I understand it has issues as all things, but everyone neglects to mentions BEVs fall downs. Charge times, battery degradation, mining, mining pollution, weight, recycling. The Tesla semi is set to have either 3.3 or 5.5tons of batteries! Hydrogen would actually be better suited in this case but people are so fixated on BEVs, whether it be because of miss information or their Tesla stocks it baffles me.
Why the hate? I dunno but these people sound like the petrol heads that hate ev's. Maybe all these haters bought tesla stonks at 800$
The cost of having a hydrogen powered truck makes it unreasonable. the average size of a normal gas tank is 12 gallons, while the average tank size of a semi truck is 120 gallons. A hydrogen cars tank is roughly 4 gallons and if the ratio of a hydrogen semi tank compared to a normal hydrogen car is the same as gasoline then the tank on the semi would be about 40 gallons. If you fill up a hydrogen car all the way at a gas station it would cost you around $80, so if you filled up the truck it would cost $800. The range of the truck might improve because the hydrogen will make the car lighter but if optimally the trucks range is 400 miles you are paying $2 a mile for your truck. compare that with the gasoline truck that would cost $400 to fill up and gets 1000 miles of range. it is completely unreasonable to think that anyone would switch to paying twice as much for gas but getting less than half of the range that you would get from diesel. the tesla semi on the other hand has a range of 500 miles and costs around $100. the large amount of batteries is definitely a flaw because the fossil fuel cost to manufacture them will be immense, but paying 8 times less for gas is worth it. Battery degradation is a problem but not as bad as you make it out to be. Tesla's batteries are reported to have a 10 to 15% battery degradation between 150,000 to 200,000 miles. The average truck drives about 45,000 miles per year. this would mean that if you were to replace the battery as soon as it started to degrade you would do so every 4 ish years. To buy a new battery for the truck it would probably cost a max of $60,000. that seems like a lot but remember that it only costs $100 to fill up the truck, you are saving $300 every time you fill up and if a truck fills up every 1000 miles in 4 years you would of saver about $54,000. that is less than 60,000 but shelling out 6,000 every 4 years to keep your truck's battery in perfect condition is a minor expense.
@@gunnarchristianson6726 You can make your own hydrogen at home for free from solar panels if that's your concern. It's only 80$ because of the returns the industry must reach out of tiny amount of customers. It's basic economics of demand and supply. If hydrogen was produced industrially for nationwide use, the price would drop exponentially. In high volume the profit gap would even out on a lot of customers and the basic cost would decrease to energy cost. The only cost of hydrogen fuel is the energy lost in conversion straight from electricity, which the industry can get out of the lines. People are just misled. For every 1 KWh of energy is required for 5 KWh of H2 energy which is pretty good comparing the electricity cost per KWh of electricity needed. Nobody understands how important it is to have a car that uses a chemical that is everywhere around us and converts back to itself.
Hydrogen cars don't make any sense batteries have higher energy density, safer, less expensive and more readily available and practical hydrogen cars may have made more sense in the 80's before more modern batteries but now I'd imagine hydrogen cars will make up very small part of the market
@@treymansfield7919 I disagree in part, while it's true that they're safer, less expensive is not a given, BEVs were super expensive a decade and half ago, its a matter of scale. Also, lithium is taxing on the planet, very polluting, and while it is reusable to a degree, it's going to be very bad for the planet if it becomes the main fuel source for humanity's cars. H2 is extremely versatile because a) it is easy to add to existing gas stations, as it works similarly, so infrastructure is an easy solution b) it is readily available everywhere and c) it is much more accesible for long haul drives
This poorly researched video uses quotes like, “78% of automative executives believe that fuel cell vehicles will be the breakthrough for electric mobility”. Adding a percentage to an opinion does not make it a fact. I truly believe that this video was paid for by the oil industry (currently hydrogen is produced as a bi-product of oil refinement).
Explain your opinion why hydrogen cars are not better than. Ev
@@fallen8689 he never said they were
Haha true let's stick a percentage on an opinion because it sounds good 😂
C 9 Hydrogen has and for the (forseeable future) costs more something like 9 times that of gasoline. I’ve been hearing about Hydrogen cars being the wave of the future for last 25 years and they’re still “just on the horizon”
@@fallen8689 this is why ua-cam.com/video/f7MzFfuNOtY/v-deo.html
This video won’t age well
It's fine, just like the doctors recommending Camel cigarettes.
it hasn't aged at all.. Its the exact same story from the popular science magazines in the 90's
It's already 15 years in the past.
I bet in 50 years, there will still be people thinking that hydrogen car is the future of mankind...
This video is from the past when Tesla was yet to make a single car. Or the creators are just sellouts working for oil companies.
I like how they forgot to mention the extremely inefficient method of how we get hydrogen.Even though it's abundant it's extraction is completely coal based it actually harms the environment more than coal produced electricity
ua-cam.com/video/f7MzFfuNOtY/v-deo.html
That methane one, Yes
That means we should still produce hydrogen even through inneficient method, even if it's only at 10% efficiency, for the sake of the environment and our future generations in hundreds of years. Mother nature don't care about your greed if we don't do something it's gonna back clash at us, our future generations.
We could make it from water.
@@pilotavery if u r referring to electrolysis ND the amount of electricity is uses which is obtained from burning fossil fuels not very efficient m8 unless u r obtaining it from renewable sources but it won't be a waste of nrg cos it wud be better to put it directly into an electric car then first use it to obtain hydrogen then hydrogen to run a car on electricity . Energy is wasted
@@pilotavery And it will be even more inefficient because the conversion ratio of electrolysis is utterly horrendous.
9 year old kid: I will make cars one day
Business Insider: Meet the 9 year old who is destroying Tesla.
Me: **FARTS**
Business insider: meet the next billionaire who’s replacing gasoline with hydrogen
@@grimsobad8545 Jesus Christ 🤣🤣🤣
Even AC was something weird at Tesla’s time but now the reality is much different. Every house use that. The same for hydrogen cars, everybody makes jokes about them but the future will do the same as it did with the AC and DC...
@@grimsobad8545 9 year old: where are my finger paints? I'll build hydrogen cars in my spare time.
(same kid @ 30)- geez! it costs like $5 a gallon just to make hydrogen. this is stupid. WHERE'S THE BEV ?
@@HeresTheGenZFlorentineFolks. scientists & engineers, not to mention nasa & darpa have been trying to crack that code since 1950. and? THEY'VE GOTTEN NOWHERE. next you'll say that fusion is just 5 years away. AGAIN.
battery tech? just as soon as someone poured a few $100k at the problem? solutions started popping up all over the place. since the very FIRST battery that ever existed? (1860, lead acid) we've gone from lead acid to nicad to nickel metal hydride to lithium ion to 4680 lithium dry chemistry (5 iterations & MANY times the energy density)
in 160 years- the EXACT same amount of time that electrolysis has been around- except? electrolysis hasn't gotten any more efficient than it was in 1860. no real ground breaking developments- nothing to make it profitable to invest in.
even spacex doesn't use hydrogen for rockets & that's the ONLY place it ever made even the slightest amount of sense.
Business Insider: BEVs are too heavy. FCEVs are light!
2019 Tesla Model 3 long range BEV: I weigh 4072 lbs.
2019 Toyota Mirai FCEV: I weigh 4075 lbs.
Business Insider: Oops!
Business Insider: BEVs are too expensive and don't go as far
2019 Tesla Model 3 long range BEV: $48,990 travels 322mi
2019 Toyota Mirai FCEV: $59,455 travels 312mi
Fuel cell Technology is at development stages ....once even BEVs never made sense remember....times change ✌️
They both have the same relative weight. Power trains are pretty much the same. At the scale of a car it doesn't work out. Now the scale of a 3/4 ton truck that equation favors a fuel cell.
@@HK-cw1kz Hidrogen will never make sense, because in order to mass produce it, you have to use electricity. So in the end Hidrogen will work as a very inneficient battery, with very expensive infrastructure needed in order to re charge it.
Only compressing hydrogen yields you 50% less energy. If you add efficienct of running cell backwards (to produce hidrogen from electricity and water), then you get luckyly 40% efficiency overall.
So basically a very ineeficient battery.
The only place it can have, is if the fuel cell becomes so cheap it's basically free. Then people will pay a little more for gas in order to be filled a little bit faster.
Business Insider: BEVs can only increase range by increasing battery size, with diminishing returns due to weight.
2019 Nissan Leaf, Kia Soul: double the range with the same size and weight battery as previous gen.
2019 Tesla cars and Jaguar iPace: increases range via an over-the-air updates.
2019 Toyota Mirai: same range as in 2015 because the size of the tank literally can't be any bigger, and there already is no boot space.
I love sitting on hydrogen tank, it makes me calm and relaxed
at least you will get Hollywood levels of explosions when you crash.
Thus is quite a typical worry
Totally unfounded as it is much safer than liquid fuels. In a major accident the worst thing would be a rupture of the tank. Within a few seconds the gas would escape and all would be safe. This is not true with petrol as it will flow over everything and when lit will burn ferociously.
@@gissit1967 Hydrogen is extremely difficult to seal, it can escape through microscopically small gaps. And if it ignites the flames are invisible to the eye. It also has a low lower-explosive-limit (LEL). Hydrogen...liquid or vapor.... is a very tricky substance, it is not benign.
@@9UaYXxB Yes, I spent 20 years in the oil industry and am well aware of the challenges. None are insurmountable though. It is still safer in many ways than liquid hydrocarbons. On a vehicle, any leak would soon dissipate as the quantities are quite small. Storage tanks and fuelling stations are a lot more dangerous though. Batteries are not without risks either.
Swede McGuire
Petrol vapour sits in low lying ground which makes its very dangerous.
Hydrogen dissipates quickly as it is lighter than air.
"The problem with teslas are they are far too expensive for the average car buyer." literally 2 sentences later. "One small problem with hydrogen fuel cell cars is they are a teensy weensy bit expensive."
fr this dude is so against tesla
lmao produce hydrogen cars at the same rate as BEV and fuelcell cars are cheaper
@@paulriehm7638 consumeable wheat make drunk
Its because we lack the infrastructure and once we solve the thermodynamic uncertainties in containing hydrogen then it's a win win situation for all. Fuel Cells is the future.
used, the mirai off lease is ridiculously inexpensive. we bought a lightly used 2016 for 11 grand.
Oh wow as soon as I finished this video, I got recommended a video called “Why Hydrogen Cars Flopped”
Donut Media video.
yeah, I watched that vid right before this one
Lol after reading this i have looked at the recommended and yep!
Lol same
@@stephen_2091 same
Shout out to Real Engineering and their video "The Truth about Hydrogen"
In fact, battery electric vehicles are receiving less energy prices, because they are receiving government subsidizes. If no current government subsidizes for battery electric vehicles, then battery electric vehicles will use the almost same energy prices as gasoline combustion vehicles. I explain : governments apply very low prices of gasoline for gasoline electric generating stations, so you get the current low price for household electricity. Governments did not think that these low prices of electricity are used for cars too. But government apply very high prices of gasoline for gasoline filling stations.
If people use more grid electricity for charging battery electric vehicles, then governments can rethink to apply the same gasoline prices for gasoline electric generating stations as the the gasoline prices for gasoline filling stations.
So do not think that battery electric vehicles really use very low price of energy. now let's do a fair test for reality. You just try to buy retail gasoline to run your gasoline electric generators to charge your battery electric vehicles, then you will see the real true energy price for battery electric vehicles when without government subsidizes !
ua-cam.com/video/f7MzFfuNOtY/v-deo.html
@@abstractexchange5057 Ah right the price I pay at home for my every day electric consumption is so "low" because of subsidies on ev cars.. got it.
@@miyuden4118 yeah you are right that energy price of electric vehicles is low because of government subsidies. The question is that, where is cheap energy for electric vehicles ? Cheap energy is from coal, gases, oils, fossil fuels. It can not continue longer. i think that people will continue using battery vehicles parallely with hydrogen vehicles in the future, but hydrogen vehicles will be more 50%. When they produce more hydrogen from renewable energy, then the energy price of hydrogen cars will be cheap. Battery vehicles are necessarily for direct charging from renewable energy, but renewable energy is intermittent, so people need hydrogen cars. The energy price of electricity depends on time of day. It always nocomfortable to wait for charging, so it is forever reason for a lot of people to choose hydrogen cars. Besides, people live in apartments in cities, and they can not charge at homes. energy price of hydrogen cars now is nearly cheaper than energy price of gasoline cars. You see that a lot of people still prefer gasoline cars because they do not like the nocomfort of charging battery cars. So they will be pleasure to switch to hydrogen cars if there are enough hydrogen filling stations. Besides, the world is going to establish some popular global standard sizes of hydrogen balloons for vehicles, so that any warehouses can easily store standard sized hydrogen balloons for exchanging, and it will be motivation for more hydrogen cars. Believe me that hydrogen cars will be more 50% in near future when people produce a lot of hydrogen. VIP people and rich people will always choose hydrogen cars, but electric cars are necessarily for poor people
@@abstractexchange5057 Where you get energy from depends on where you live. And the energy price kWh is the same when I charge my phone, when I use my AC when I use my Water boiler. You get the point. I pay 0,1493 per kWh and my state gets it energy 60% from renewable. This is not due to subsidies for EV's.
Cheap energy comes from solar, wind, water and battery peak stations.
Did you ever see how incredible expensive a coal peak power station is and sometimes they got to fire up only for a few minutes to sustain the grid. Not quite managing because it takes long and and is inefficient to fire it up for peaks. A battery rig powered by solar can easily and rapidly manage peaks without extra costs.
Of course some people yet cannot charge at home because they live in apartments without garage, the car is outside and so on. But imagine that changing with streetlights being added to the charging network. This is not a crazy idea, this already is happening. Imagine on every apartment building's roof and on every house a whole solar rig that poweres batteries which help to sustain the grid and also cheapen the energy cost for everyone.
Solar panels are getting more advanced and batteries are getting more advanced. This is inevitable.
I yet failed to see how every human being would be able to help contribute to a Hydrogen powered energy grid. Hydrogen is getting attraction to be innovated and researched mostly by companies who already are in power of oil and energy nowadays, because with Hydrogen they stay in Power because you won't be able to produce it yourself at home without doing anything. You would still need them, thats why it is attractive for these companies.
And thats the reason why it does not make sense for normal persons like you and me to support that.
The infrastructure for Hydrogen cars is so far behind and cannot catch up whatsoever. Because it is easier to charge a supercharger with solar or wind than it is to create the pressure needed for Hydrogen, let alone you have to create Hydrogen first and deliver it there, which is not as fast as energy.
The grid for energy already stands. It just needs to switch from fossil fuels to sustainable energy.
"Tesla will have to increase range, while decreasing charging time and cost"
Which is exactly what they've been doing consistently since the company started
It's 2020 and they just bumped up the Model S to 390 miles of range
The v3 superchargers are incredibly fast
The production is going up, which like you said, leads to costs going down
Tesla probably won't stand a chance against hydrogen cars once the infrastructure and technology progress even a little. Well maybe they can but they are going to have to switch to hydrogen.
@@austinblackburn8095 yeah hydrogen cars are much better, also, considering the fact that the efficiency of batteries degrade over time. But hydrogen cars dont have the comfort of electric cars, since u can charge an electric car, anywhere that offers electricity, which are a lot of places, compared to hydrogen.
@@photonicsauce7729 hydrogen is plain stupid like Elon said. You use electricity to break down water and get h2 to then transport it and put into a car and use it to make electricity again? What's the point why not use use the electirct to power the car directly. Batteries are getting so much better at such a fast pace all the disadvantages will be gone in 5 years. Add in less maintenance, no oil changes, no expensive hydrogen, faster charging in future, free charging from solar on your house? Ev win easily. Also chargers are cheaper than installing hydrogen stations and hydrogen is pressurized which is very unsafe.
@@blastmaster7660 ur seeing it in a narrow view. Watch a video made by real engineering and google the data. U will know
@@blastmaster7660 hydrogen is pressurised and unsafe lol. Then dont use a gas stove next time or a pressure cooker or dont live near a freaking city that has pressurised gas lines.
Wow. This video is a classic strawman argument. Focusing entirely on the few strengths of fuel cells while not mentioning the gigantic downsides. Bravo.
Absolutely, present car manufactures don’t want us to be free .. they want us chained to the car where as Tesla is trying to free us ...
@@Orionnomad I don't know what conspiracy theories you have been reading and watching, but that's the stupidest thing I've heard since the outbreak of the coronavirus.
Lmao. That's not a strawman argument that would be providing a valid point against something but that something they are giving a valid point against is not true. Here is an example: A: We should relax the laws on beer.
B: No, any society with unrestricted access to intoxicants loses its work ethic and goes only for immediate gratification.
The original proposal was to relax laws on beer. Person B has misconstrued/misrepresented this proposal by responding to it as if it had been something like "(we should have) unrestricted access to intoxicants." It is a logical fallacy because Person A never advocated allowing said unrestricted access to intoxicants (this is also a slippery slope argument).
Thank you.... hydrogen is just a nother form of battery, a very inefficent one
For sure - they also just skated past: A: The fact that most of the hydrogen comes from natural gas, with the carbon vented to atmosphere B: getting fuel cells to be cheap is not just a question of production volume, and has stumped humanity for decades C: It happens on airplanes that more fuel will eventually not produce more range, but in a car with regenerative braking, the battery would have to be absurdly big for this to happen (in fact, some people tow batteries behind their cars for increased range. An integrated battery would be even better).
As long as they're cheaper, reliable, and I can find a station in many places I'll gladly make the switch. Until then I'll stick with gas.
At least with full electrics, the refueling station can literally be any plug lol.
And by the time, the time for the switch comes, e-fuels will be avialable as well. Their market readyness is higher because they can use the existing network of gas stations
This so called "documentary" is pure garbage. Many electric vehicles are already cheaper in terms of overall lifetime cost of ownership & virtually all are far more reliable than petrol burners. Hydrogen might eventually have some application for long range heavy fleet trucks, but it's far less practical for passenger vehicles than electric. I've done a hell of a lot of driving over the last 30 years in all manner of combustion cars. I still get good use out of my old manual transmission Matrix but nothing comes even remotely close to our Tesla Model 3. Because we do almost all charging at home it costs virtually nothing to run. The way it drives has completely spoiled my wife and I for anything else. Why worry about "finding a station" when you can charge at home? For road trips, charging stations are already almost everywhere.
@@drrobcwillis look,electric car has advantage for now,if i had to choose,of course electric car will be far better than hydrogen car,but maybe in the future,it will be a better alternative,when hydrogen car become cheaper and it's station is everywhere
And i don't know about you,but i don't get electricity at home for free
@@daffs7166 - Mass producing hydrogen fueled vehicles could certainly bring down the cost of the individual cars, but that's not really the problem. The problem is that building out & maintaining a network of hydrogen fueling stations is orders of magnitude more expensive than building out a superfast electric charging network of the kind that has already been built & is growing exponentially. There is no technological way around those fundamental massive cost differences. There is also not way to get the costs of producing & transporting hydrogen down to anything close to that of gasoline, let alone electricity. The drastic losses of efficiency involved of using energy to manufacture hydrogen, move & store that hydrogen, then convert it back into electricity as opposed to using electricity to directly charge a battery are insurmountable, and almost as polluting as just burning petrol directly. Again, there are certain applications where the power/weight density advantages of hydrogen may make it a better choice than electric; such as in the case of long range transport aircraft.
re. "And i don't know about you,but i don't get electricity at home for free" - No, I'm on the grid & my electricity is not free, but my crude guesstimation is that out it costs at least 10 times as much in terms of regular petrol to travel the same distance in my still ultra efficient manual transmission 2014 Toyota Matrix (I love that car!) as it does to travel the same difference in our far more luxurious 2021 Tesla 3SR+ if all charging is done at home. There are all kinds of far more detailed analysis of the comparative costs out there, so you don't have to take my word for it. I'll also guess that you do have electricity in your home, but you have access to even a single hydrogen fueling station where you work or live?
Okay, but will I get to refuel my car at my house? I love the fact I can charge while I am asleep and wake up to a full charge. Or charge for free at work on my 8 hour shift and leave for home with a full battery.
The only time I could think it makes more sense is a road trip, but how often do you go on those?
Tesla and the interstate highways don't mix
What if tesla added something which helps charge it as its driving? Like, collecting wind power while its driving or solar panels? Or like hybrid cars where the car charges itself. Not sure if it already has something like this but these improvements would help for long trips :)
@@cocoacoolness they could easily do that but the cost of the car would go up...
There is a breaking point where people so to expensive of a car I'll pass
Best comment
Business Insider: "An increase in range requires a larger battery"
.
Tesla: *Increases range through OTA update*
Not to mention they have continually increased range while simultaneously decreasing the battery weight.
Plus, fuel cells are limited by tank size and batteries are limited by constantly improving chemistry - in ten years, FCVs will not go nearly as far as EVs
@@davidhood9712 ok....mr doing his research
@@davidhood9712 just enjoy what life has given to you
That graph was when this video earned its downvote. "*My* technology is going to get better! Yours isn't, see?"
@@Rager_U yeah, and all with zero demonstration that fuel cells have actually improved at all outside of lab results. One time a lab claimed to have gotten power out of a cold fusion device, but I have yet to see that results repeated, let alone scaled up and deployed.
Didn't mention anything about:
-Plug-in hybrids (high range, enough electric for daily EV, instant fueling with existing infrastructure)
-Hydrogen cost
-Infrastructure cost
-Market effects
-Engineering potential of batteries vs fuel cells
-Maintenance cost
-Performance limitations
-Ecology of hydrogen cycle vs battery cycle
I do hope The Algorithm brings this back in, say, 5-7 years.
Edit: I have no problem with hydrogen, just the massive lack of analysis that this video gave. Hydrogen has great promise for commercial vehicles, huge potential for development, and it's infrastructure shouldn't be too huge a deal once petroleum starts to become less profitable, which is soon enough. Still don't think it can beat BEV for personal vehicles though.
And no mention of how dangerous hydrogen is....
M A it's about as safe as gasoline. Chillax
Logan, also the maintenance should be about the same as an electric vehicle, or very low, tf you mean by market effects? Plug-in hybrids don't have instant fueling, info structure is literally gonna be a gas station with some hydrogen pumps as well, and this tech is so new we don't exactly know, besides that the excess fuel just becomes harmless water, e.g it doesn't matter
Metal hydrides are in development, I think Fuel cells have their own benefits and we shouldn't dismiss it outright. I for one am glad for any and all competition to gasoline.
@@EntropyConcept Agreed mostly. For plug-ins I meant you won't be held up significantly by running out of EV capacity; Road trips are doable an still more efficient than standard ICE. For infra, from what I understand, there's no rational way to combine a hydrogen system into an existing petroleum station without rebuilding the entire thing, so they would require new stations.
My biggest concern about BEVs is that they require a battery to run. Like most people on this planet I have been using battery-powered devices for years. And I hate the fact that batteries degrade over time until they become useless. Having a battery-powered car would mean that the car's max range will degrade over time, and that I would have to replace it at one point. This is not only upsetting for the car owner but also not really environmentally friendly.
Facts. EV isn’t the future…
Not to mention very costly.....to replace a battery of an EV u wide be looking at $10-12K
@@fireWireX4 Absolutely!
@@JayRM714fr
Year 2060: Headlines -- Hydrogen will be the fuel of the future.
Wash and repeat every decade
or 2060: Hydrogen prices have hit an all-time low this year and flat-Earthers realize that it's the most abundant resource in the universe
Also, electric cars have actually been around since the late 1800's. If you research the history of EV's, you see that it took over a century to be a standard, affordable car with proper infrastructure in place. It's not 'if', it's 'when'.
Ironically this might even become true around 2060 - however not as fuel for oxidization but for fusion. Quite a different realm^^
@@samuelmontypython8381 I've been driving electric for a couple years now and it's honestly the best car I've ever had. Especially now, I get to charge it at home and not touch the COVID infected gas handles ;-)
Next one: Why Cars With Pedals Will be Tesla’s Greatest Threat
Cars with FSD will replace cars with petals, its like All cars with Petals will be like Driving a Horse & Buggy in 2019.
I'm working on that. Just wait...
Lmao 😂
lol
J they are too weak compared to the pedal car, a car designed for pedaling
WRONG. AGAIN. charging a tesla (motor club reviews by ACTUAL owners) is between 82% to 90% efficient depending on climate and rate of charge. NOW: hydrogen. by electrolysis, you lose 20% right off the top. plus the cost of distilled water. Liquifying the hydrogen so it can be stored & pumped into the car is around 15% energy loss. that's before the sellers & middlemen get their profit. that's before you have to do the maintenance on the equipment to generate, transport, chill and compress the hydrogen. so... 35% of your product is waste before you even start. and then big oil STILL controls the price, so don't expect that $8 a gallon price tag to go down anytime soon.
Until the infrastructure is not available electric is still better
@@davrocket5304 yeah with capitalism it might take a very very long time
I searched for that comment! I wanted to say the exact same.
Actually, u lose about 27% not 35%
27... IF you use the natural gas to hydrogen 'cracking' method. but if you do that... what's the point? you'd be better off just burning the natural gas in your ice car.
I've always been a bit reticent to argue with a guy who builds rockets, sends them into space and then brings the tanks back and lands them up right - on a boat. He caught on to one thing when he started building electrics. You must have a charging network. So he built one. And how many people need more than 4 or 500 mile range a day? Now where do I go to get that hydrogen to fill up with again?
Hydrogen is manufactured using electricity at a massive loss of efficiency. There's a reason why Elon Musk says it's incredibly stupid to use hydrogen, because it is totally unsustainable and if everyone switched to hydrogen it would take 2-3 times more power than regular electric cars.
yeah Elon Musk builds rockets all by himself too. in his basement.
@@AP-bo1if Yes he did when he was a kid. You do know Elon is the lead rocket scientist at spacex.
@@anson_phong and much electrity does it take to make a telsa
@@anson_phong hydrogen cars are environmentally sustainable whereas batteries I believe aren’t, I believe bio fuels are the best option, keep our cars, not great on the environment but there are counters
"The only thing realy holding FCEV back is INFRASTRUCTURE"
HAHAHAHAHAHA treating INFRASTRUCTURE like a minor fixable issue.
...and failing to mention the ~20k$ higher price of FCEVs which is a massive showstopper for consumers.
While Fast EV charger required 10x less money and time to build up and you could install normal one at home!!
That's true.. it's not easy to built gas storages stations when compared to electric . I don't think people really care about whether it's electric ,hydrogen or focil fuel ,they just want power and convenient to use . So if there are more hydrogen stations then people will buy hydrogen vehicles .
Muka Zero: 100x to 1000x cheaper actually
@@petfashi.c0m672 Which will never happen, ergo BEVs will take take over (or stay taken over).
after watching this... I feel like it's still 2010.
does Elon Musk pay you or do you do his work for free?
@@theshinywolf None of the above, he's just not stuck in the past.
Whyyyy
+Maxadax "batteries have reached their ceiling" This is the dumbest statement that I've heard in a while. Tesla is about to roll out their new battery tech and many others are as well. You are badly misinformed.
@@Islamisthecultofsin ok fanboy
Business Insider: Why hydrogen cars are a threat to Tesla
Me: Sure?
I feel like they could be
but the market and infrastructure for them must grow
Hydrogen fuel cell cars fit the system that we know today. Refuelling the petrol to full tank will not take 75 min. Electric cars are just the intermediated point between petrol and hydrogen fuel cars. Just like hybrid petrol cars that stand between the petrol cars and electric.
FABS MEME POLITICIAN And the tecnology must get cheaper
@@tnak004 Electric cars are evolving, in the future you will be able to charge them in seconds.
*Refueling*
Hydrogen: Fast, but limited by moving physical matter through a pipe
Electricity: Slow, but ultimately limited only by the speed of light. Graphene shows some promise in charging instantly, but the issue of discharging slowly needs to be resolved. Regardless there are constant improvements to current batteries.
*Energy Production*
Hydrogen: Needs electricity to break water into hydrogen and oxygen, guaranteed to lose some energy by laws of conversion. Something like fusion could make this loss practically irrelevant.
Electricity: May be created sustainably in some cases with very high efficiency. The whole world is working on improving the tech.
*Transportation*
Hydrogen: Pressurized pipelines and trucks. Highly explosive but we managed relatively well with explosive gas. The pressurization is very costly though and about half the energy is lost here.
Electricity: Instant delivery through cables which are needed regardless. Charge stations don't even need to store the fuel. This for me is the no-brainer argument for electric over hydrogen.
*Energy density*
Hydrogen: Very high, but requires an energy input far greater to create it than one get out of it. This can never reach 100% on earth since hydrogen is locked up in molecules.
Batteries: High. Currently enough for cars but not most large aircraft.
*Efficiency* (energy in to energy out)
Fuel Cells: Very low. 20-60%. Including production, transportation and consumption, only a small amount of the initial energy results in propulsion of the vehicle.
Batteries: Currently at 99% and could be increased in the trailing decimals.
*Responsiveness*
Hydrogen: Requires some startup time (few minutes) to start extracting full power.
Batteries: Controlled by microchips but ultimately limited by the capacity of the motors and G-forces manageable for driver/passengers.
List could go on with mechanical complexity, service life, noise levels etc but batteries usually come out on top.
*Summary*
Hydrogen is not a fuel, but a storage of energy, like batteries, but unlike the latter, need fuel cells to extract it.
Does it make sense to use electrolysis to break out hydrogen from water just to later reverse it with a fuel cell? Perhaps for big commercial jets.
Fuel cells are super cool but we need to strive for simplicity long term. Push for fuel cells to electrify the airliner fleets and move to batteries when density is high enough.
Batteries are some of the least energy dense things *there is* . *Literal garbage* has a higher energy density.
Renewables are also so irregular that there's going to be massive spikes in electricity usage that need to be filled by a storage medium- and again, batteries are way more expensive than hydrogen (which is still expensive) due to the energy density problem (need more batteries to replace than fuel cells, even though both have a similar lifespan).
Charging time is limited by battery degradation and endurance, not light (not to mention electricity doesn't travel through power lines at light speed- electricity is not composed of electrons, not photons, you know...) www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590116819300116
business insider: hydrogen fuel cell cars have higher range than battery electric cars
also business insider: Tesla's cars have higher range than fuel cell cars but they are too expensive for the average consumer.
business insider again: Fuel cell cars are more expensive than Tesla's cars.
The reasoning of business insider is impeccable.
Excellently surmised! 🙂
They're saying the fuel cell cars could easily drastically lower their price while Tesla will have a harder time.
Clickbait
@@rotters2556 I´ve heard something like that 20 years ago. Still waiting. Also the prices of batteries dropped 10 times in the last 15 years.
@@rotters2556 there are precious materials in hydrogen cars such as titanium and platinum. Is really really rare materials
"Major automakers still see promise in hydrogen"? 😅 😂 🤣 Major automakers are hemorrhaging their market share to Tesla... They are the last people to listen to when it comes to the future of cars!
Right... that’s why in 17 years (since Tesla was founded) EV cars have taken 9% of market share...Lol hemorrhaging
@@pastramisalsaandjelly8759 Yes hemorrhaging, lol, that is why VW, BMW and Mercedes are literally revamping their entire vehicle line up to be fully electric by 2030, all because of Tesla, Because 9% is do or die in a trillion dollar industry my friend.
Looks like the content was uploaded 10 years later...!!
10 years too late.
Reupload 10 years later..
I'm more concerned about the what happens to those batteries after they don't charge any more
Into the ocean they go ha
@@c.s.n.7695 recycling of parts
@@seankilburn7200 what "parts" exactly
@@c.s.n.7695 the metals used in the battery can be used in other appliances or new batteries. tesla are already working on gigafactory recycling plants
@@seankilburn7200 only some of the metals can be recycled... Metals deal with lots material degradation. It's also an extremely difficult process to recycle used batteries.
I'd be interested to know what percentage of a used battery can actually be recycled. I just feel this whole idea behind EV vehicles that they're better because they're good for the environment and more sustainable is all "smoke and mirrors" as they say ha
So are you suggesting to spend electricity on creating a hydrogen from water, then transport it in near crygenic temperatures to a fuel station, then, again, produce electricity from it in your car? It's just a waste. Not to mention a cost of such fuel.
I was waiting for this point in the doc. The biggest challenge related to hydrogen cars is the cost of extracting hydrogen. However, the doc says, its lack of charging infrastructure, LMAO!
You don’t want to drive around in a hydrogen bomb 🚗💣 🤣
Correct
@@MushfiqAKhan I too, was waiting for it
Waiting for the point where he mentioned cost of production distribution and storage of hydrogen itself. But he dint Hence looks like sponsored video
One thing that is not talked about is the first hydrogen car can charge I five minutes. The second hydrogen car has to wait 20 minutes or longer to fill up. Plus the hydrogen stations cost allot more to build than a EV charging station. Good luck buying a hydrogen car. No need to take notice at a failing technology.
I wonder if you've ever heard of moore's law? You should look it up. In the 1960s the most advanced computer cost millions of dollars. Today, your $100 Chinese made smartphone is 100x more advanced than the aforementioned computer of the 1960s.
@@jzk2020 Moore's law is about the number of transistors in a given area on a chip, in other words, it's about the physical density of processing ability. It's not applicable to any other technology. You're probably thinking about economy of scale.
@@jzk2020 Lmao if I had a nickel for every time someone brought up Moore's law in the most out of context situations just to sound smart, I would be rich. Everyone knows what Moore's Law is, and even that isn't grounded in science like actual theoretical "laws" are. It is literally just a guess at the future of progression, which is proving to not be accurate anymore at present. It has nothing to do with this. The cost prohibitive nature of the hydrogen cell lies in its infrastructure and production, not it's compactability??
@@beymaster923
According to Moores law, the top speed of cars should double every 18 months. The fastest road legal cars today can do about 250mph.
So in 18 years we should have cars that can do a million miles per hour. The future is gonna be crazy.
@@lazarus2691 Hahahaha. Very nicely done.
In 2000 I read an article : " Hydrogen the fuel of the future" ... ten years later, in 2010 I read a similar article. Now, in 2020, the same idea comes back as a boomerang. Looking forward to year 2030 to hear again about the great future of hydrogen fuel ...
Water powered car is already invented in the Philippines more than 2 decades ago, but the corrupt Government didn't support it and they let the innovation/invention died. Most of the Filipinos who are aged 30+ knows this.
@@roiferreach100 coolant nitrogen use cyrogenic for cars fusion
Show me a single article about HFCEV in 2000, I’ll stop talking.
@@roiferreach100 No, I'm sorry. Water is highly stable, therefore requires more energy input to receive energy output. Look at sources of energy: gasoline, diesel, kerosene - mercy, even a rubber band wound up to power a toy car! - they are all unstable and volatile because they are a chain reaction waiting to happen. Water is the opposite. This is why you throw water on a fire and not gasoline. There can never be any chemical reaction by which water produces energy - it is as immutable as the laws of physics
@@ieditedmyname289 This article is from 1997, announcing that hydrogen fuell cell has finally arrived: They say, I quote" After decades of unfulfilled promise, fuel cell momentum is now so great that its emergence as a predominant technology appears just short of inevitable." www.wired.com/1997/10/hydrogen-3/
The best use case is for trucks and semis. For cars, we do not yet have a dedicated infrastructure, but trucks usually stick along specific highways, and can have large tanks to store sufficient fuel for round trip.
This is so misleading it's funny.. BTW I've had my Tesla for years and never been to a supercharger, my car charges at home while I'm sleeping.
Yes, except for long trips, I always charge at home. Also, they claim it takes well over an hour to supercharge from 0 to 100%. Who drains the battery down to zero and then charges all the way up to 100%??
@@kenbob1071 quite true :). saw a study not too long ago that showed upwards to about 80+% of electric car owners never once charge at public charging stations and thus only at home. so obviously that works. also as i understood teslas.. you should charge it to about 80% if on the road and then leave it unless you have time as the last 20% takes longer. i dont recall why but makes some sense i spose :)..
But people whining about range.. i mean.. if you drive 300+ miles a day.. i guess you should look at your options before buying a vehicle.. but i also question why youre driving that distance.. as for "road trips" .. the vast majprituy of people never once in their life goes on one, nor leave their city of residence , by car atleast.
@@ndaemon1718 Yes, it's easier on the battery to slow down the charge rate when it approaches a higher state of charge. That's why I never charge to 100%. I took a 2,500 mile road trip last Fall and never had any problems. Charging was quite quick and a welcome break after driving. Since then I've just plugged it in at home and wake up to a full "tank." Nice!!
And only required burning 3 tons (6000 lbs) of coal to recharge it!
@@kenbob1071 excuse my stupidity but how do you charge it at home?like do u have a charger in your house or sum?
Doesn’t mention that it cost three times more to fill up
And 10x more than battery electric. At 30¢/mi for H2 ($17/kg) vs 3¢/mi for electric (14¢/kWh), Hydrogen has a really long way to go to even start to threaten anything.
Just like they said. Limited production. If the production increases, cost goes down exponentially.
@@skiran69 It doesn't matter the volume, you still lose 50% of the stored electrical energy breaking the H2O bond and compressing the gas. Then you also lose 50% of the energy combining it back into H2O making electricity in the FC. You are left with 25% of the original electric you started with to drive the wheels. You can argue that we can make that a few percent better, but certainly not exponentially. The only production volume increase you can make to decrease the cost significantly is to continue to make H2 from natural gas and drill and frack more as they do now releasing the CO2 byproduct into the atmosphere. You might as well just burn the natural gas if you continue doing that instead of hiding it behind the name hydrogen.
@@scottkolaya2110 who the hell said that electrolysis of water is the only way to produce hydrogen. Recently Iranian scientists found a way to mass produce hydrogen using waste generated from cities.
@@scottkolaya2110 I stress on the term 'Mass production from waste'.
I feel like 20 years ago people had the same argument and we went almost nowhere in that time for Fuel Cell other than they don’t cost 250k anymore. This video seems to be a very biased argument against BEV that currently get more mileage than 99% of people need in a given day.
However, I do get the range argument if you cannot add a charging station at your home.
How is this biased?
@@thorben6092 the comparisons are chosen by examples that favor cevs
@@thorben6092 The narrator failed to mention new battery technology that can reduce the weight problem leading to diminishing returns.
He mentioned many drawbacks for BEV but not many for hydrogen. There are actually many problems with hydrogen tech and it is not just the low economics of scale that is causing the prices to be high.
Scientists have discovered a way to make cheap catalysts recently. They are normally made out of expensive metals like platinum which keep the cost high. I follow hydrogen news quite devotedly. The biggest danger for hydrogen is that it hurts other subsidized energy who desperately want to keep their guaranteed income.
I agree with Elon.
"Mind boggling stupid"
You can throw this video in along with fuel cell vehicles.
The promise major automakers and the oil industry see, is that hydrogen is mostly created through petroleum products so they're essentially keeping the same business model going.
Mandolatron : yes, plus maintenance of such vehicles is very special, and fueling is ONLY at the stations.
Free yourself - get BEV and charge at home, at work, at most campgrounds ⛺️ , anywhere where electricity is. Speed of fueling doesn’t matter in such. And this is 95% of the cases.
@@unxusr do you mind me asking how much it costs you to go 30 miles with your EV? It's $3 a gallon in gasoline terms
Peter Wu : rule of thumb - 4 miles per kW. So approximately 7.5kW for 30 miles. If using grid electricity which is 9 cents in winter or 11 cents in summer drive 30 miles would cost from $0.65 to $0.83.
But I also installed solar panels. So my electricity cost me btw 2.9 to 3.5 cents per kW (Taking into account amortization of the system).
So in my case driving 30 miles cost me around $0.25. 😜
@@unxusr Nicee
@@proTRUMPproREALMADRID I set my chevy Bolt to charge from midnight till charge is full. during those hours, electricity is ALWAYS cheap.
1. What about the price of the energy source? Hydrogen costs 5 times than electricity!
2. You can recharge your Tesla in your garage and never visit an EV station, but you can't store hydrogen in your garage..
Yotam Kedem maybe in future people can make like hydrogen machine and put it at home but i think that technology may take 50 years to develop
Spaghetti God and explode right
And more people buy it more close we to crisis water
Said it perfect
@@muhammadwalid8440 water crisis? venice is flooded at high tide. we should use the flood water.
Sad this video has no scientific data to back the claims. Only stating the economy of scale principles. Ignoring the huge engery wasted when producing hydrogen.
Richard Jorissen what about mining of the raw materials for batteries?
Batteries also use a lot of resources and energy to manufacture. It is basically choosing the lesser evil.
@@Huhbear1 That happens once during the manufacturing period, then the materials stay in your car for 10 or more years
bhazi numbr I see
We have cheaper ways to develop Hydrogen now. Www.Proton.energy check them out
Hydrogen production: burning methane.
Charging EVs: burning coal.
Flintstones car: pure perfection.
Tesla superchargers are powered by solar energy
Ok so then why are ford, Gm, Audi, VW, etc. investing big in battery EVs?
Awesome point.
Well it’s because bev’s are much easier to mass produce than hydrogen cars.
Because they are not financially and/or technologically capable of investing in the next-next generation of personal mobility. BEVs can't replace all mobility. FCEV can replace what BEVs can't.
May be,No one having enough dare to mass produce fc cars!..like Elon did..not to forget initially automotive experts called him mad!
@@fakeis200300 without a fueling network hydrogen has zero potential to go cross country. And why would trillions of dollars of fueling infrastructure be maintained for a very small number of drivers? That would be so economically inefficant. The fuel stations will all shut down the instant government isn't sibisidizing the majority of the cost.
What a "mind bogglingly" under researched video. Go ahead and watch Real Engineering's video on the same topic. He's explained this topic in great detail and why Fuel Cell EVs won't be a thing
Yeah hydrogen cars and then water crisis
In my opinion hydrogen is the solution for planes and ships as you need only localized fueling and super high range with efficiënt refueling. Therefore using the technology in cars to somewhat offset the cost is logical. In the case of cars I think it's more future proof to invest in battery technology. Consumers use lots of small devices with batteries in them, so a joint venture aimed on Consumers in batteries is a much more logical choice. In addition the fueling Networks as mentioned in the video.
@Ziggi Mon please name 5 advantages.
@@mauritsbrood5778 So when I plan a trip with my family. I will have to wait like 5-6 hours in midway for charging? Doesn't really make sense. Plus world doesn't even produce enough electricity to power both their homes and cars. Additionally, renewable resources like sun and wind-based power plants are not efficient. Eco-firendly Solution: Share the load, keep electricity related stuff to basic home and office needs, mobile phones and tablets and the transportation load to Hydrogen.
@@AmritZoad Let's park (see what I did there😁) the case about the quick improvement of both charge technology and range of BEV's currently. I wasn't saying you can't or shouldn't be able to, just that in my opinion it is Impractical due to the way hydrogen fueling currently works and the lack of Network. But if that offsets the problem of range for someone they absolutely should take a fuel cell car. Maybe a car with both a fuel cell and a battery cell is even possible. But for the majority of trips a BEV seems more practical under current conditions. Considering the power Supply problem, to make hydrogen you need electricity as well right? Therefore you will lose power to heat by both producing hydrogen and converting it back to electricity which will always be less efficiënt. Even if this wasn't the case a big hydrogen to electricity plant would be more efficient than small hydrogen engines in cars so using that and BEV's would probably be more efficient still.
I feel like this was a paid for ad by (insert company names).
Lada😂
An ad by Shell
Nikola
Nikola
Water companies such as Fiji.
Elon roasts hydrogen cars.
Hydrogen cars : I am about to do what’s called a pro gamer move.
Maybe after 100 years,not before.
So much misinformation in this video.
Why you so triggered if this is the future we should be opened minded. You shoud like gas powered fanboys when tesla first came out.
Drake Nel , not triggered. Just pointing out that the video is giving misleading information about electric cars-specifically Tesla-which I own because I’ve done lots of research.
Drake Nel , also, hydrogen isn’t the future. They’ve been trying to do it for a long time. They can’t scale it to make it affordable the way that electric cars are scaling. It’s not just the cost to manufacture, hydrogen is more expensive due to transport. It’s tough to walk more than a few yards without being around electricity. Even IF the cost of hydrogen could be cheaper than electric, people have already tasted the performance of EVs.
@@myalias641 bro ur being one sided ev might be the trend now but it can change anytime hydrogen is the future
Hydrogen explodes dramatically.
"Just water" water vapor is the most abundant greenhouse gas, idk if fcev would damage the eviroment tho.
A big argument is range, i dont have a tesla but from what I know people just plug in at night and have range for the whole day np.
Why don't you guys honestly say that this video is sponsored by "ANTI-EV MANUFACTURERS"........
Or
By "PRO HYDROGEN FUELED VEHICLE MANUFACTURERS " ......
In fact, battery electric vehicles are receiving less energy prices, because they are receiving government subsidizes. If no current government subsidizes for battery electric vehicles, then battery electric vehicles will use the almost same energy prices as gasoline combustion vehicles. I explain : governments apply very low prices of gasoline for gasoline electric generating stations, so you get the current low price for household electricity. Governments did not think that these low prices of electricity are used for cars too. But government apply very high prices of gasoline for gasoline filling stations.
If people use more grid electricity for charging battery electric vehicles, then governments can rethink to apply the same gasoline prices for gasoline electric generating stations as the the gasoline prices for gasoline filling stations.
So do not think that battery electric vehicles really use very low price of energy. now let's do a fair test for reality. You just try to buy retail gasoline to run your gasoline electric generators to charge your battery electric vehicles, then you will see the real true energy price for battery electric vehicles when without government subsidizes !
@@mattc7939 I know, people get energy in USA from coal, gases, nuclear energy, and emerging renewable energy. So the situation is worse for climate. If we do not need to care about climate, then people can forget hydrogen and hydrogen vehicles.
The speech about hydrogen and hydrogen vehicles emerges only in our renewable energy era. And I can guarantee you that, hydrogen passenger vehicles will be popular more 50% of all future passenger vehicles. The main reason is not only in the hydrogen vehicles. The main reason is that people need to use hydrogen to store renewable energy. Renewable energy is intermittent, nuclear energy is intermittent (you can not continuously vary power of nuclear energy station), and energy itself is volatile too. But only energy carrier is stable. We have natural energy carrier, which is coal, oil, gases, but unfortunately we can not continue to use more these natural energy carriers. So we must synthesize our artificial energy carrier, which is hydrogen. It is a forever problem of no synchronizing energy supply and energy demand. All scientist and experts confirmed that it is necessary to decouple energy harnessing and energy demand, because of the forever problem of no synchronizing energy supply and energy demand. It means that people must convert renewable energy into hydrogen, parallely with direct using renewable energy. It means that people must and will produce a lot of hydrogen in the future to solve the forever problem of no synchronizing energy supply and energy demand. With a lot of hydrogen in the future, it will be profitable to use hydrogen directly in hydrogen vehicles. Electric vehicles will be used to get direct energy from renewable source too, but as you see that you can not always get direct energy from renewable source at any time of day or years. So hydrogen vehicles will fulfill this very big gap. Just remember my sentences, in near future when people will produce a lot of hydrogen, you will see that passenger hydrogen vehicles will be popular more than 50 %.
It is logical truth strategy view. I can give you one example about this view. In the past time, people always said that it is profitable to use only fresh food, and it is not profitable to use industrial food. Because need to pack and utilize fresh food to make industrial food, so need extra fee for these intermediate process of packing and utilizing fresh food. But now, you can see that people eat fresh food and industrial food parellely. People now even eat industrial food more than fresh food. And once again here, the reason is the forever problem of no synchronizing of supply and demand. Fresh food is direct energy from renewable source, while industrial food is hydrogen. The same situation will happen, that people will use parallely battery electric vehicles and hydrogen vehicles, but when people use more renewable energy, they must produce more hydrogen, and we will see that hydrogen vehicles are more than 50%.
@@mattc7939 You are stupid, I was referring to car manufacturers not electricity !!!!!!!!!!!
Hydrogen cars are inherently electric cars (they don't burn hydrogen like gas cars!) so good hydrogen vehicle is actually a good electric vehicle. Hyundai already has a fleet of (normal) EVs, and their efficiency is the closest to Tesla than any other old car makers. Toyota isn't very well known in the EV segment, but it is the king of hybrid cars. Saying hydrogen car manufacturers are anti-EV for some reason is uninformed argument and simply isn't true.
@@gitcat6671 Well everything you said is vice-versa of the reality 😑😑😑
What the video doesnt tell you, its incredibly expensive to open hydrogen fuel stations and those stations can only fuel a few vehicles an hour because they need to maintain pressure. It makes more sense to use electric since the infrastructure is already in place. Business insider is just trying to create some propaganda for the legacy auto manufacturers. Electric already won, just look at Model 3 sales.
Jesus... this video is making an assumption that there will be no breakthroughs with battery technology increasing their range. And complains about electric costs when its super cheap to own an electric after its initial purchase unlike hydrogen cars. F this video.
besides, hydrogen doesn't appear naturally so you have to use electricity to make hydrogen in the first place
Without numbers or sources prooving otherwise, your claim is invalid.
It certainly is, although batteries and their charging stations used to be more expensive too. The other big problem with Tesla you don't seem to know is, that the production of each vehicle is more than twice as polluting than the manufacturing of a car with a combustion engine, and the materials needed for their batteries, especially lithium are also in limited supply. Hydrogen does not face that challenge.
@@chacle811 Give me a source for everything you just spewed ... where did you come up with this??
friend hydrogen is obtained through electrolysis or some deep seated rock below ground so its like BEV with extra step
OMG I’ve never seen such a partial video! It brings up all hydrogen strongpoints and battery weak points but COMPLETELY ignores hydrogen weak points. It does bring up that Elon has called them stupid, but does not tell you anything about why he says that!
WHY?! Why does Business Insider create a pure propaganda video for hydrogen?!
For reference watch Real Engineerings video on the matter which is unbiased as things should be!
kaboom
Two engineers walk into a bar. First one says "I'll have an H2O". Second one says "I'll have an H2Otoo" and then he died
Lol
Mrbeast
Damn them chemistry jokes.
I GET ITTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
chem all day
Brillint
I have to assume this is satire
( the only thing holding us back is the infrastructure😂bruh!)
@@ChosenSquirrel exactly
@@ChosenSquirrel this is actually the first I've ever even heard of this technology. I'd love to know more, could you elaborate, please?
"While some teslas have more range, they also cost more than the average buyer is able to afford", *shows pic of model 3*. Yeah defently not meant for average buyer.
Its hilarious when you compare a tesla model 3 to a hydrogen car like the Mirai. The tesla is cheaper, has a longer range, is 10x+ less expensive to charge, has double the power and you can charge it at home.
This video was maybe believable back in 2012 when Tesla was just starting out with $60K-$150K models with just 265 miles of max range and just a handful of supercharger stations. It’s 2020 and EVs now have close to 400 miles of range with 500-600 within the next year or two. And there’s also 100x more charging options worldwide and exponentially increasing. Charging 200 miles of range also went from one hour to just 30 minutes and getting faster. Soon I won’t even have time to take a piss before my car app tells me it’s done charging. There’s even more public places and business that offer charging while you work, eat, play, and sleep at their locations. Can’t do that with HFC vehicles anytime soon or ever.
And where’s HFC today in comparison to all this? It’s been the fuel of the future since the 70s and was heavily supported back in the early 2000s. Yet it’s literally almost in the same state of limbo now as it was back then. I was a Toyota fan and was really interested in HFC before I became a full BEV fan. After doing my own exhaustive research, I was convinced that FCV is just a bait and switch product by Big oil and everyone entrenched in oil and ICEV industry. I continue to keep an eye out for any big developments in HFCV, but it’s inherently reliant on advancements in two things in order to improve: Battery and the energy source used for production. Which is basically saying HFCV tech will improve when BEVs do.
I feel like hydrogen will be most useful for planes, where the energy density of a battery is not dense enough.
agreed
Yup
Liquifing hydrogen requires hard work and some times hydrogen can blow
So does gas and electricity
Exploding lithium batteries anyone ?
@@fancy3774 compared to gas and electricity, a hydrogen explosion is much more devastating. It's the most flammable element on the periodic table.
@@werock2785, don't worry about the flammable part, when hydrogen is compressed it cools down like helium.
@Leonard Church now you are talking about hydrogen being flammable while your whole life you've been driving flammable gas cars without any problem
Hydrogen fuels make no sense at all
aj barry what? How?
@@heyimgayalso6129 well first, the charge time may be fast, but after a charge, it takes the pump over half an hour to recalibrate. That's half an hour of down time where no one cane charge at all.
@@heyimgayalso6129 You have to make hydrogen using guess what, Electricity. Hyddrogen is also very hard to contain even in a completley closed container and it will leak out fast, if you left it in your driveway for a week your fuel tank would be empty. Also hydrogen is very dangerous, puncture a hydrogen tank and it will explode with a violent force that will rip you appart and depending on the amount of fuel also half the roadway. Gasoline burns, Batteries burn with toxic fumes and hydrogen explodes, would you rather have a chance of survival or die instantly? Also there are other problems with hydrogen others have pointed out...
@@heyimgayalso6129 It takes massive energy use to separate hydrogen from oxygen only to put it back together. It is useful for some types of applications, but it needs to be cryogenically stored to maintain a weight economy to be of use. You have to store it in high pressure containers for any other application, and by that point you have an invisible gas that needs high pressure systems to move and divide. It isn't like gasoline that you can pour into a bucket and back into a fuel tank.
It is hard to use. At this point there are fuel cells that can take light alcohols like methanol. liquid alcohols are easily pumped, don't require pressure vessels, can be put in buckets and poured into tanks, and are clean to burn just like hydrogen. Light alcohol fuel cells will be the future fuel of choice for extending the range of electric vehicles.
@@bimbo1384 they store Hydrogen as Ammonia not as a pure Hydrogen gas. Nitrogen atom will hold multiple Hydrogen together and can be released later. Ammonia is very storable, we have huge industries producing Ammonia to feed crops as fertilisers. Our production capacity for Ammonia is quite high, we can distribute Ammonia very easily if needed.
Okay, some missed points:
- Can you fuel your hydrogen car at home in the garage? (No)
- How many hydrogen cars a hydrogen station port can serve in a hour including the re-pressurization between fueling? (Its about 4 afaik, which is on par or below a supercharger port)
- How much such a station cost compared to a supercharger location?
- Total efficiency chain of hydrogen creation -> fueling -> fuel cell electricity generation VS BEV charging into battery + cable cooling -> withdrawing electricity form battery?
- If the answer to the previous was not "hydrogen is terrible less efficient than BEV charging", then what environmentally destructive method was used to create hydrogen instead of electrolysis, and with what byproducts.
- Given that hydrogen stations and cars have to store the universes smallest molecule at extreme pressures, has the issue of lasting and safe sealing of the storage solved yet?
- Given that so much more Tesla supercharger exists than hydrogen fuel station, which of the two had how many violent explosions so far?
There is not a single reason for this tech not spreading, there are many.
hydrogen cars vs battery cars war in 2000s is gonna be like the DC vs AC wars of the 1900s
Apt comparison.
Hydrogen fuel cell is like Edison's DC.
Battery electric is like, well, Tesla.
@@chrismuir8403 true..
Why build a network of hydrogen stations.
When you can adapt your house to charge your car. Actually a regular 110 wall outlet will do in a pinch.
@@chanceDdog2009 Why adapt your house and 30k for a car to wait hours to recharge, when you can just buy a second hand I4 equiped gas car for less than 1k? more than that, a golf or a corolla are pretty cheap to refuel as they have quite good millage, and there's no infrastucture problem, take a jerry can with you just in case.
It’s gonna be a war, but not that big one. Last year over 2 million electric cars are sold, while less than 50,000 hydrogen cars were sold. The reason why electric cars are being sold more, because they are faster or luxurious more tech focus and they cost less. You also have a lot more places to charge electric car and you just can charge it home with 99% of the time works, if you have one
@@capitaohectorbarbossa9172 because Teslas are the fastest sedans, cooler, and in five years, and a Tesla model 3 Standard range plus cost the same to own as a 25k Toyota Camry. Besides not everyone wants a boring Toyota, and we are giving the choice, and could afford it they would choose tesla most likely
Hydrogen might work for container ships or airplanes, since their energy use is beyond what current batteries can provide and also they operate out of ports their infrastructure could be more centralized
Also huge city buses and class 8 trucks
Good points
Yeah, good use case. I think big ships could be a real deal here, electric flight will be here in five years.
There is some power issues, though... Fuel cells are not really good at creating a lot.
The problem with this is that the hydrogen is more expensive than an equivalent amount of gasoline.
@@SalivatingSteve I agree with you that a hydrogen container ship would cost more. Overtime the cost could come down a bit but I'm not sure if it would ever be cheaper. With that said it could still be worth doing, considering the amount of pollution these ships put out
Someone needs to watch more @Bjørn Nyland
He had a couple of pretty detailed videos about hydrogen tech. To sum up the basics - it's never going to happen!
Andrej Gobec exactly
It seems as if you have completely ignored the benefits outlined in this video. I have just watched Nyland's video and he hasn't highlighted any significant issues with Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars. The issues outlined were:
- Water emitted goes onto the road. Which I guess in colder climates could be dangerous but is an infrastructure problem
- Can't Re-fuel at home like he could with his Tesla
- EV's are cheaper
- Fuel Cell life span
- Hydrogen Fuel cell cars are expensive
- Infrastructure
All of these issues can be solved once people realise the EV's they are buying to save the planet actually powered by a national grid that uses fossil fuels. The only thing stopping Hydrogen Fuel cell cars is infrastructure and that's. Once fuelling stations are built, this will drive manufactures to build in larger numbers and therefore reducing costs and ironing out imperfections associated with the power train. Be open to new technologies.
@@highland96 I have no problem with new tech. But hydrogen fuel cell technology is something like fusion. It's always the tech of the future and it's always about 20 years away.
And no one mentioned how much money is being invested in each technology. EV's currently pull hundreds of billions in investment - how much is being invested into fuel cells? This quite clearly points into rate of innovation.
If fuel cells ever become a mainstream choice - all the better for us consumers. The entire point of this exercise is for ICE vehicles to become the alternative not the mainstream they are today. We need to boost our efficiencies and move to a sustainable energy sources.
End this one: ua-cam.com/video/f7MzFfuNOtY/v-deo.html
Will have to watch this video a decade later and probably laugh on .. .. ?
Ikr 😂😂
Why wait?
We can start now actually
"Insider" in a deep hole...
How stupid ....
Honestly, I prefer Battery Electric Cars.
Why?
Simply because I can charge it in my own home at my own sweet time.
With hydrogen, you CANNOT !!!!
So it is back to square one, as with gasoline as you will be at
the mercy of the gasoline producers.
So, what about electricity producers?
@@Hypertyz Yes, what about electricity producers? eh?
What about?
We all know that every house is with electric supply unless you live in cave.
Do you live in a cave.?
So with electrical supply, you charge your EV anytime but NO house in the world, is with a gasoline pump.
And lets not forget when you buy that hydrogen at a fuel pump it would have been made by burning fossil fuel with worse EROEI than using it in the car to begin with
But at home it takes a long time to recharge.
And tell me, how do we people get the majority of the El. energy that supplies the world?
When you get the answer maybe u will reconsider your statement bcs even with ur "sweet home charging" u still at the mercy not only of gas corporations but also of el. providers in your state.
Feels like paid content
vishal by Toyota
It is indeed paid content as before the hydrogen even gets into your vehicle, it is subject to a ton of loss in efficiency and after that, all that hydrogen needs to be converted into electricity to mechanical energy, further losing energy.
I thought the same thing too
Yep
A very handsome pay of 5 hydrogen fuel cell cars I assume.
I take it the American Petroleum Institute made this video?!
i see a bright future for Hydrogen in heavy Vehicles like Trucks, Ferries and Ships and even in Aviatiion than for Battery Electric Vehicles.
I hope the cost for Fuel Cells come down and they have some alternates for Platinums used in the Fuel Cell stacks. As far as H2 is concerned, we alreayd have use cases where Green H2 can be made for less than $3 /kg. and it is only going to improve.
My theory: The other car companies want hydrogen because it’s unreliable, meaning continued income for dealers.
Tesla is one of the worst in terms of reliability and maintenance though. Their price drops like a rock after a few years, no one wants them after all. I wouldn’t bet against Toyota.
Man is that really your argument? You really need to go look at the common causes of ICE vehicles then... You’re going to be heart broken to find out you just walked right up their alley.
@@Texarmageddon Except the eletrical malfunctions of traditional ICE cars are due to the moronic and archaic way in which they design those electrical systems, which Tesla has already solved by simplifying them. ICE vehicles are more unreliable than EV's, and that's a fact
Miguel Pereira Tesla reliability stays lower than most ICE cars .... I think not sir
@@Texarmageddon No it's not...? Where did you get that information mate
"Elon might want to take notice" lmao
Some good info but you forgot one important comparison, refuel cost! Driving a EV I get enough charge driving locally everyday without needing to refill.
This video looks like a paid ad. very bias towards EVs
you would be RICH or Crazy as FCV cost more than $100 to refuel, you can Fully Charge a BEV for $5 overnight , or slightly more at a FAST charger.
I could see some sort of “hybrid” fuel cell being the future. You plug-in and charge off a ‘small’ (compared to BEVs) battery that runs in the car kind of like a plug-in hybrid, but for longer drives you go to the hydrogen station. It’s a win-win. Like that is my dream car, now can it not be ugly?
Mercedes F-Cell: The concept you described, doesn't seem to be getting anywhere. But it is a rather nice idea
Elon musk says:
Delet this
I was under the impression that hydrogen was inefficient to produce then I viewed some videos on a new science that is basically self generating hydrogen - and not through renewable energies. Sounds weird but when you see some of their validation demonstrating vid’s, you will see what this means. Type H2IL into youtube - it's truely game changing to say the least...
David G Elon doesn’t want us to know
@@linclokatz Elon doesnt want you to get misinformed and spread ridiculous facts that make no sense whatsoever
piepsi03 shutuo elon fake account
hydrogen is a ridiculously wasteful way to store energy
When all i got is a 2009 manual cheapass vios.
even worse bro, i got a 2010 manual Hyundai Santro
Even worse bro , im 19 and still dont have any car
2004 mazda demio😂😂
2003 Honda Accord lmaoo
@@siysamuel wait what? No, vios is different.
Video: Hydrogen combines with oxygen
Me a 14 year old: thats just water.
Fuel cell cars are the future. The electric cars are just the “cool things” of the moment. Everybody is talking about them and that’s why automakers makes them. As I said fuel cell cars are the future
kaboom
Dude just wait 30 years and look at the Tesla electrical cars in the streets. Just sayin ya know
@@fallendown8828 fuel cell too.
@@HeresTheGenZFlorentineFolks. fuel cells are very unefficent and makes us lose total energy but i guess they could take a %1 place. People who has a lot of money to spend and don't like waiting for charging can but it but in general it is just too unefficant to take a big place
@@fallendown8828 no, Bro... you don’t understand... now, can u imagine an aircraft with batteries? You know what’s the matter? The weight! And here come the Hydrogen
Hydrogen fuel stations cost $1-2 Million to construct, while electricity at Level 1 is everywhere. This is video is a joke
Right
2:10 "Hydrogen cars seem to come out on top again"
Toyota Mirai: 312 miles at a cost of $59,455
Tesla Model 3: 322 miles at a cost of $40,815
The Tesla Model 3 has slightly higher range, despite the Mirai costing roughly 50% more...
Also worth mentioning - you can charge the Tesla Model 3 at your house. You can't refill the Mirai with Hydrogen the same way
Also technical they also electric cars. Only plus is charging time or refill time that saved.
10-20 years from now, I’d still choose hydrogen.
The point of both electric and hydrogen is to lower emissions yes? I just think hydrogen is more convenient for an everyday drive.
Don’t really feel like sitting on my ass for 5 hours when charging a vehicle.
I sound stupid yes, do correct me zoomers
It's good for people who have range anxiety (almost everyone)
Plus the Model 3 has that AP
Not to mention at home you are charging electricity at domestic rate not commercial
4:22 - well, someone has slept during the studies. They're already doing exactly that 😂 lmao. This video is plain dumb.
Why are you hating?! He put a lot of effort into making this video, I bet you can’t make a video anywhere near as high quality as this.
@@D4wGr1 credits for the effort. But not for the false information. This video makes more people misinformed about Tesla cars.
Yeah, I can just see those 2 million dollars each hydrogen filling stations popping up everywhere. Not to mention that I can charge a BEV overnight almost for free.
Lol, sure.
I'll keep my electric car for now thank you.
“IT RUNS ON WATER, MANNN!”
Hyde thought of it first.
This is soo sponsored. 😂😂😂😂😂
shakir ali it’s not tho unless they’re breaking the law
Sponsored yet so biased
Real Engineering: hold my beer
real engineering is a teen age boy who knows shit about all the topics he talk..
Gas companies paying this channel to do this video...
Be woke
Ryan Roussel
It’s still less emissions than If you just burned petrol straight from your car.
Also the grid can be cleaned up with renewable resources.
Hydrogen most likely will always release emissions through methane cracking because electrolysis is so inefficient.
@@Ryanrou7 so is your hydrogen car my friend
dude, gas companies aint gonna profit from selling hydrogen. Hydrogen from gas is mind bogglingly stupid. But hydrogen from cars arent
Hydrogen cars:"need hydrogen factory, pumps ⛽,)
Electric:"just plug it and you good"
@INNOCENT SCIENCE but if solar panels get better then it can provide a little bit of charge in case of emergency
Or can charge the battery if you're out camping
@bad bad mc bad because everyone who can't afford $25.000 solar panels and $50.000 tesla car use public transport
@bad bad mc bad that's exactly my question..
And 6 days to recharge in yankie voltage.
@@adidia2163 What if i'm having an emergency? Don't i need a car?
'If and when' sums it all up!!
Dream on!!
Like they did for the combustion engine car and the electric car 100 years ago. Look at how that turned out. One mobilised billions, and the other is mobilising millions on the back of fossil fuels.
I heard about this stuff back in 2015, before I was old enough to make this account.
Hydrogen costs about $5.6 a gallon equivalent. Electricity is much cheaper, and you can charge over night in your garage, which makes it more convenient. Can’t do that with hydrogen or gas.
But you won't get your garage on the highway /freeway
I'm just pinning this video so I can find it back and laugh at it a few years from now.
That's what people did with Tesla and spaceX
@@antoine1597 So that they can eat crow a few years from now? Must be a tasty dish.
@@kenbob1071 your taste buds must be pretty messed up
@@kenbob1071 This is actually the first I've ever even heard of this tech. It looks really cool but this video is getting alot of hate. What's wrong with hydrogen cars?
@@antoine1597 Not as messed up as your head...lol.
yeah you’re right, they’ll really BLOW UP 😂 ... ok I’ll let myself out
“ ok I’ll let myself out “ 🤣🤣
Elon: Hydrogenpowerd is trash. It`s obvious!
Business Insider: “Reality can be whatever I want.”
“Physics is the law, everything else is a recommendation”
If you are looking for science the last place you want to look is in a publication called business insider. These jerks can’t even do banking without ruining The economy, why should we trust them with science. Business majors are the stupidest people I ever met in college except for athletes. Often they were one in this same.
“ teamwork boys, come on boys, we got a beat the competition, hydrogen is everywhere, let’s go get it, we’re gonna show those engineers.“
A freaking joke of A publication, business insider. Look at how many negative thumbs down they got, tells you everything, because this is not political, this is about Luddites versus science.
@@steveperreira5850 " hydrogen is everywhere, let’s go get it, we’re gonna show those engineers.“ HAHA this is gold.
Haha
Hydrogen is the future fuel, when everyone has its own aircraft, you want lightless, batteries is shit for that, I what flying cars, why Elon Musk with his Mars exploration, I want to see a flying Tesla car.
Tesla already has a solution for charging time and range.
Version 3 super chargers are rolling out. A 5 minute charge recuperates 75 Miles. In the next couple years Tesla’s are going to have a range of 500+
In a couple years toyota nissan honda ford will have high quality electric cars lol
@Emil@youtube Nah. Tesla wil use their full production themselves, no giveaways here. ;)
They would disrupt the auto industry like crazy. 1 thing though. THEY COST $100 TO FILL UP!
Sean Murphy that’s what we pay in Germany to fill up our petrol engine cars. So that wouldn’t be a change for Europeans.
Bruh, that's a normal price for petrol cars outside the US lmao
As soon as the supply chain grows those costs will fall
This video is actually pretty embarrassing for them. Even research papers by the hydrogen council (biggest hydrogen lobby group) don't see hydrogen playing a significant role for consumer automobiles. It's like they decided to just ignore all the science.
Where's the Tesla bag holder ☝🏿☝🏿☝🏿
@@Crixus5927 moron is directly above me
Another key factor when chooshing EV over Fuel cell is vehicle maintenance, as fewer parts reduce both replacement cost and likelihood of failure which saves money in the long run.