I work at Tesla so I obviously feel different about what technology will drive the car of the future. However, I wish Toyota all the best. Regardless of whether you believe in biofuels, hydrogen or electricity like I do I feel we should all pursue our chosen passion with all the vigor we can muster. The more technology we can put into cars that doesn't require fossil fuels the better off all of us will be in the long run. :)
Justin Crediblename Lol... 17 or 18 years ago we heard the same about the first generation of prius. I wonder what toyota knows that we don't know? Between paied endorsements and you tube self proclaimed scientists, half truths are everywhere, and complete understanding are very rare.
you mean the past. who makes all the money from selling all that hydrogen,, just imagine yourself or anyone driving down the street and that high pressured hydrogen tank leaks. bunch of hindenbergs waiting to happen., if a battery ruptures the outcome is 99% less catastrophic.
ajbauto Wrong on so many levels. If hydrogen leaks form this vehicle, it recombines with the air and becomes water vapor. Learn about what actually made the Hindenburg blow up. It had nothing to do with the use of hydrogen putting aside 150 years of scientific advancement since then.
Hydrogen is lighter than air, if you have a leak it will go up instead of all over the ground like gasoline would. it will also dissipate a lot faster than gasoline. They had the same concerns when cars first came out. If we can increase the efficiency of the fuel cell, I can see it powering the future. But it won't happen till all the people that are getting rich on gas are in control of the hydrogen production also.
Hydrogen combining with air to form water is called "burning". As in "fire". Also, the largest producers of hydrogen, with the cheapest source (steam reformed natural gas) are the oil companies. They plan to sell that profitable new fuel when oil gets too expensive.
The future is not fuel, the future is radiant energy capture. Pure and simple. No refueling, no exhaust and all the things we want from a modern car. There is a way, an idea is all it takes.
Have the issues with fuel cells been resolved? I haven't seen them used used successfully outside a limited number of fork lifts and demonstration vehicles.
Can you get more energy out of the hydrogen than it takes to separate it and compress it? If you can, why not use the hydrogen at a stationary power plant to generate electric to charge BEV's? This would avoid all the concerns of high pressure tanks in vehicles that run the risk of being in accidents and seriously limits the whining about "infrastructure". If it takes more energy to separate out the hydrogen and compress it, isn't it a zero gain environmentally,; what energy source are they using to separate the hydrogen? Where is the hydrogen coming from, is it being stripped from fossil fuels? Many unanswered questions at this time. I say Toyota should go for it, but Governments need to not "Pick Winners" in the automotive game (and it is for sure a game).
if you could that would be free infinite energy, no you can't. it's nonsense technology, a giant fraud pushed by fossil fuel industry. 95% of Hydrogen is Fossil
While I do like the idea of fuel cell technologies, I still prefer internal combustion for transportation. Hydrogen could also very easily be used in "regular engines" designed to burn hydrogen, rather than gasoline, as well. In either case, the main benefit would be the ability to generate your own fuel with small, inexpensive personal/home hydrogen generators. If this is taken seriously enough, we could all replace our current gas or electric furnaces with hydrogen burning, or fuel-cell furnaces, even further reducing needless sources of pollution. While considering throwing a few solar panels on the roof to generate power to split hydrogen to fuel our cars and heat our homes, we could also have a few tanks to store hydrogen we didn't use "that day" and have our own reserves on hand, for when we DID need them. Just thinking...
I am a fan of both Dr.Kaku and Elon Musk, I believe they are both expert in the engineering field. However, in a recent interview, I saw Elon Musk mocking the idea of Hydrogen cars, saying that it is not viable but in this video, Dr.kaku says otherwise. Can anyone tell me which one of them is right?
Currently petroleum is the major game changer in world economy then how will the world economy would be impacted if hydrogen vehicles replace the petroleum ones ?
Where the hydrogen fuel cell car fails is in economics. The per-mile cost of hydrogen fuel is higher than the per-mile cost of petroleum fuels, and nearly 5x the per-mile cost of driving electric. Hydrogen is more expensive than electricity, and always will be. Then add in the higher cost compared to plug-in hybrids or battery electrics, and the conclusion is clear. The future is electric.
my man you came from the future too? i heard a hydrogen station blew up recently in our time? and tesla has taken over the world with this wondrous car called the model 3.
I would go with Tesla for now just because I'm a fan of spirited driving. At the same time I would like to see more of those hydrogen cars in the near future. Every direction which is going away from combustion engines is good. Hydrogen is one of them. It's easier to manufacture cars with electric engines that is why most companies are going that route. And it's all good. But people need to realize that time can make a big difference and if the sufficient effort would be made, hydrogen engines could be much, much better than they are today. I like that Toyota is going that route. Keep it up!
The dawn of a new age upon us, this is the beginning of a new future!!! Imagine a airplane using this technology? or a train? how about a tractor trailer? yes, the damage done to our planet will be repaired, thank you guys, thank you so much, for sharing this technology to the world and showing that yes we can change for the better, for all of the engineers at Toyota, thank you
i would argue that for Kaku to be willing to put his name on it, and Toyota to announce it they must be pretty close to a larger push on these. Also the largest problem for the hydrogen economy isn't getting energy from hydrogen or keeping it, its the storage size. Gasoline is much more compact compared to H2.
molecular hydrogen, unless we are just talking about loose protons? im not clear honestly i was making an assumption that may be wrong.but the arguement of a compact fuel source is still an issue.
+king leighton if you buy the car from toyota it's free for 3 or 4 years, but then 50 bucks for a 300 mile fillup after that. This, keep in mind, is purchasing cheap hydrogen extracted from natural gas. When we start running short on natural gas, we're gonna have issues cuz then we'll have to extract it from water. Sure you can make natural gas from plant wastes and poop, but not THAT efficiently. And production of new natural gas is sorta not what a lot of these green tech buyers want to support.
***** since it's finally entering the age of financial competitiveness, it will continually gain in popularity. It's really an exciting thing to watch. Energy independence is going to simplify the political atmosphere by reducing the influence of at least one corrupt industry over our people worldwide. To add to my excitement, I just got ~9 kilowatts of salvageable sunpower e20 panels (20+% efficient) for free on craigslist the other day. Woooo! While I think the average californian would need about 22kw of solar to offset their entire energy footprint, it's at least a good start :p ...but I digress. if there is a far more efficient way found in the future of performing electrolysis, then I think the primary problem associated with HFC vehicles will be solved and I feel it'll still be a viable replacement for hydrocarbon fuels. But currently, I agree, it's simply no good.
The funny thing is that it's very expensive to gain hydrogen using electrolysis of water. Most of the hydrogen used today is obtained from natural gas or crude oil...
Amazing to read the comments left by the high school educated skeptics... Makes me wonder why they are so against replacing gasoline with hydrogen. It certainly can not be because they understand the physics or chemistry involved.
No one is against replacing gasoline, but pure electric is a way better option for many reasons: 1. Hydrogen is 95% substracted from hydrocarbons which generates co2, the only difference is that it doesn't do it in the city but where hyd is produced 2. infrastructure to hyd ready society needs to be huge and built from scratch. on the other hand pure electric cars work with the existing electric network. 3. hydrogen is compressed to 700 bar or 10000 psi, do you realize how much pressure is that? is huge and a huge problem also in case of something going wrong it's ok to develop alternatives, good for Toyota, but electric cars are just better
I'm not opposed to replacing gasoline, I just came to realize that electricity is a far better option to do that. Hydrogen costs a lot more than electricity on a per-mile fuel cost basis, and always will. Even when using the cheapest hydrogen source of steam reformed natural gas. Hydrogen from electrolysis is even more expensive due to inefficiency - using electrolysis and compression for storage and fuel cells takes 3x more electrical energy than the equivalent charger and batteries. Then add in a higher price for an equivalent fuel cell car, and the severe lack of hydrogen refueling stations, and the convenience of home recharging (not practical for hydrogen) and the answer is clear. The future is electric.
I am hopeful to see at least we are finally discussing something besides fossil fuel as an energy source of the future. As with any energy source, there is waste, there is risk, there are unknown variables...I'll take pure oxygen vs smog any day. I respect Dr Michio and I am glad to see him supporting progress from fossil fuel dependency, Next is addressing smarter city planning to reduce commuting distances required to get from home to work, medical and retail services. Current city planning and design, "suburbs" are driving the need for more people to spend more time in cars. Better city/civilization design, smarter cars....renewed planet.
www.faculty.rsu.edu/users/c/clayton/www/tbenbrook/paper.htm - thank you James for what you wrote here because it lead me to exploration on the subject and what you explained is also outlined in this link I found. Makes me lean on your side about the scam bit.
***** Electric cars in most cases are technically still fossil fuel powered. Coal being used to power the majority of electricity plants. Also diggers mining lithium use oil and there is also the pollution problem. Nearly everything we use needs oil somewhere in the process. Who will win Hydrogen fuel cell or Battery? I don't know it may be another Vhs vs. Betamax.
Great points James - my Uncle and I just had this dialogue this morning. Every alternative fuel option has risk and as I'm learning, unfortunately many of them lead back to fossil fuels. "Yah got to give me more power Mr. Scott!" Man do we need more eco-minded Scotty's right now.(Star Trek ref)
People don't get the point of hydrogen technology. Nobody is promoting that you just get it everywhere for free. It is a means of storing energy. The problem of this world is not to get hold of energy in the first place but store it and transport it quickly an efficiently. So far that has been fossil fuel, which creates hugely harmful emissions and batteries which use materials that are very nasty to harvest and so small in number that you couldn't even supply 5% of people driving cars with an electric one. an electric car only becomes more ecological than a petrol powered one after 25000 miles of driving it due to the nasty manufacturing process of the batteries, which you will have to replace as well, because they wear out and lose capacity. So hydrogen technology is at the very least much more promising than electric cars with batteries.
CO2 engine is the one for the world energy need. It byproduct is cold temperature that can make fresh water and for cooling. It can operate with just 10 deg C heat or even lower. Dr Kaku, I like to pass this detail to you if I can contact you. CO2 engine is a world-changer!
@@skiran69 Maybe for rail, aircraft and marine transport, but not for personal transport or for short distance delivery vehicles. There's both a need and a place for both in the future.
@@davidkeenan5642 even for daily USe, FCEV's are gonna replace. Tbh it's easier to convert gas stations into green hydrogen station than replacing the whole country's electric supply with green electricity.
Hydrogen is very flammable, hence it will be a really dangerous kind of fuel. Also, Hydrogen needs to be transported in really heavy containers which will make it quite unavailable in most places.
Honda introduced this car in 2014 and has then in California. The problem is getting refueling stations across the US, but I do think this is the future for cars and large scale data centers who could produce their own energy to power servers. automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarity/
Producing, compressing, and freezing hydrogen into liquid form wastes far more energy than electric cars do. And I would opt to charge on at least 20KW at home.
air polution in big cities like Bejing for ex. is life threatening so people who live in those areas should consider this proposal very serious...I vote for this car , also electric got my vote
Watching this video, I have to wonder if at the time that Edison and Ford made that bet that if battery powered cars won out, what it would be like today. In other words, would battery technology been way ahead of what it is today. I would guess probably so.
Both will win the bet. - Batterie for casual drivers, private persons with a limited action radius (~400 km), comapies, Tesla fanboys. - Oxygen for busses, Trucks, companies, private persons with a long range action radius > 400 km who don't want to use electric trains.
This technology was developed in the 70's, but the inventor was unfortunately suppressed and his home with all of his inventions bought by the...government.
*It is about time since we have been talking about this for decades. Reminds me of Edison stealing from Tesla Be nice to update my 1970 Cutlass Supreme with the 455 to run on hydrogen fuel*
+semir kasumovic Not the only suppressed or high jacked technology. I remember seeing news articles in the 70's both on TV or in magazines about the amazing hydrogen cars. They even talked about fuel cells back then, but mostly hydrogen burned by ICE powered cars. There were also articles how Nuclear power plants could be converted to hydrogen not to mention other things. They talked about how coal could be burned cleanly, and later how it was too expensive.Look at the steel industry, Japan and Germany rebuilt their plants to newer technology after WWII with the help of the US. The steel industry was making big money in the US, so they saw no need to upgrade, they out produced everyone else, and sold so much steel, they could afford to sell it cheaper. In 20 years, the lack of technology upgrades caused them to loose ground quickly, their steel ended up costing more so the Japanese and Germans were able to make cheaper steel, hence cheaper cars. So let's get things moving and changing, otherwise it might be too late!.Diesel engines were NEVER intended to run on diesel fuel. Diesel fuel was invented FOR Diesel engines from petroleum products. Originally Rudolf Diesel use vegetable oil stating the nee for renewable energy. Herbert Stuart invented the first ICE to use a pressurized fuel injection system the precursor to the Diesel engine, and ran it on paraffin oil (similar to modern diesel fuel). So the petroleum companies HAD to find a way to fuel the Diesel, not hard since the precursor to the Diesel ran on paraffin. Renewable energy high jacked.With the canopy's over each gas stations pumps along with their roof space, why not put a roof the entire station front to back, side to side, and make the "roof" a bank of solar collectors. Use that to supplement any hydrogen trucked in. Better yet why not have under ground lines to resupply tanks at the filling stations?
Whatever... you guys are saying what we already know, But the fact that the elements in their most purest form still exist and still means that there is some form of possibility. Yeah it would be cool to have like a cloud that pops up randomly in the sky every 14 hours and then suck it all down through a straw and put that hydrogen in a container and we can all be amazed to even hold and be thinking, "Oh the power!!"
Just like it would be cool to be playing with dinosaurs that could talk and think like humans and play around together, a pet that not only looked badass but a badass pet that we would possibly dream of considering that they did in fact exist.
I just want to ask some one who knows better, will it be safe E.g If an accident happens and hydrogen tank got busted, leaking hydrogen and it got some fire and every body knows what will gonna happen next????
Batterypacks are even worse. considering the superhigh efficiency of electric cars and yet their range is poor depite the hunderds of kilo's batterypacks.
I wonder how much Toyota paid Dr. Michio Kaku. As a physicist he is well aware about facts about hydrogen. Yes hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe, but you do not have it on Earth in the form you need it, you only have it as part of other molecules. So you have to make it (from water, natural gas ...), and it takes much more energy (3 times more) to make it, than you get from it. This makes hydrogen *energy storage (very poor one)* and *NOT energy source*. For larger energy usages, like cars, hydrogen does not make sense. First, they are promoting hydrogen as alternative to fossil fuels, and 95% of hydrogen coming from FOSSIL fuels (natural gas)! Mostly from *FRACKING*. So hydrogen does not solve environment issues (unless you think fracking is good for environment), and nobody will produce hydrogen on large scale with electrolysis while cheaper alternative is available. As for getting hydrogen from water, for hydrogen you have to put in 100kWh of energy to get 23kWh to move the car. In EV, for 100kWh, you get 70kWh to move the car. So hydrogen station creating hydrogen on site will use so much electricity that it could charge 3-4 times more electric vehicles. For example, electricity used to fill up 1000 fuel cell vehicles for 300 miles, could fill up 3000 electric vehicles for the same mileage each. Price: 50$ for 300 miles? That is more expensive than a petrol car, and this is with 'cheap' hydrogen that is coming from fossil fuels, it can only get more expensive. Who loves hydrogen? Big oil companies, because they produce it from fossil fuels, and fuel cell cars would let them keep their monopoly. You can say, we will put solar panels, wind turbine or any other renewable and make hydrogen that way for 'free', but that also does not make sense, because with the same solar panels or wind turbines you can support 3-4 times more electric than hydrogen vehicles.
+Sasoon2006 You are correct that converting water into hydrogen using electric is inefficient. However, electric cars take time to charge, and people don't always have time to wait. You are however wrong about needing fracking to make hydrogen. A man in the mid-west needed electric for his home. He was so far from the nearest power line it was going to cost thousands of dollars to get electricity run to his house. He researched solar power, and found for only a small amount more he could have a fully functional power plant of his own. He heats and provides electricity for his home from solar. Since he can not return unused power to the grid, he went with hydrogen. Solar power is stored as hydrogen, which he has a couple huge tanks. When he has no sun due to over cast skies, he uses fuel cells to convert it back. He makes so much hydrogen with his solar cells he has now converted his cars to burn hydrogen. He recovered the price he paid for the system in the first few years of use, and now does not rely of OPEC for fueling his cars or the electric companies for powering his house. Besides $50 for 300 miles ain't bad, I presently pay between $43.17 - $46.67 in gas to drive 300 miles now. Gas cost $2.59-2.80, I use 1 gal to go 18 miles. 300/18=16.66666666666667. Next multiply 2.59 or 2.80 times 16.66666666666667 and the result is either $43.17 or 46.67. Back when gas was $3.69 we were paying $61.5 to go 300 miles!
+Howard Sterling Apparently someone does... But, thank god no one ever crashes their cars into other cars, otherwise we'd be running the risk of damaging a tank full of hydrogen - a highly volatile substance.
+Walter Green I use 1 gallon of gas to go 30 miles...while towing a 17 foot flatbed trailer. This is with a 1000 dollar car that needs 300 in yearly maintenance, costs less than 40 dollars a month to insure, and has cheap registration. I'm not feeling a hydrogen bug right now.
Put 10 million H-cars on the road and the roads will be all ways be wet. Slippery when wet sign will be placed every where. Need some cold and the road turns into ice!
Nice to know Dr. Kaku can be bought too. The future is electric. Forget the oil and diesel infrastructure middlemen. 9 sec? Try 3 to 6 on electrics. Let's all put the refineries out of business...
If the electricity required to electrolyse water is generated by coal-fired power like you think to do in USA ...It is a bad choice :-( but in Quebec, Canada, we are already producing green hydrogen using Hydro Electric Power..:-) So from water in our rivers to Hydrogen in our vehicules to water in our streets...:-) This is the only future for Humanity...and Japan & China could be the leaders in the car industry for this to happen...:-) Love U all :-)
corpusien No, it is still a bad choice. It takes more energy to produce the hydrogen than it would to charge equivalent batteries. Therefore, regardless of the energy source, you are wasting it by using it to make hydrogen. And that is based on the best theoretical efficiency of hydrogen production and use compared to today's batteries. Hydrogen is up against fundamental barriers, while batteries keep improving each year.
Isn't this a good idea? I mean toyota... Toyota produces a lot of cars a day. Which means within just less than 1 month, Toyota would be a millionaire for sure... Of course I would 100% buy it because it doesn't pollute. In fact, hydrogen in the universe is like... infinite!
About 95% of Hydrogen production is from natural gas and the significant byproduct of that process is carbon monoxide. So that's a really bad idea from an environmental standpoint. Production via hydrolysis is equally problematic as it is very inefficient with only 25% of the electrical energy input realised from the resulting hydrogen fuel. Given the huge infrastructure investment required (literally trillions) for production, distribution, fuel stations etc and taking into account the current and forthcoming tech advances for battery EVs then hydrogen is basically dead in the water. Very few of us will be driving hydrogen vehicles in the future.
Dr. Michio Kaku is a great speaker but the Toyota Mirai isn't able to charge in 3 to 5 minutes because there isn't any refilling stations around the World to support utopia. 1 hydrogen refilling stations costs roundabout 1 to 2 million dollars. how many gasolin stations are around the world? 80k to 120 k maybe more. this is unpossible
Don't worry, the world-wide Hydrogen Council plans to invest $10.7 Billion in the next 5 years to build out Hydrogen infrastructures. A Hydrogen station will come to a place near you.
Didn't you notice that they never talk about hydrogen production, and they only mention how only thing coming out is water. Do you know where hydrogen is coming from? 95% of it is coming from natural gas (is fracking good for environment?), creating load of CO2 in the process.
Rani Hinnawi I am a physicist who mathematically found (theoretical physics) that I shouldn't have made a comment here because now every day I get another email about Michio's youtube video and the subject. And I rarely have time for this since I have been working for CERN since 2004 Maybe everyone on this thread should donate their computers to us or the Max Planck Institute of Gravitational Physics (I start my 11th year there on the 18th of January)
***** No way would I post my legal name on a UA-cam thread.....but if you are interested in quantum mechanics,cosmology,or high-energy physics and have a good pc stop by vLHC or Atlas and I will set you up or Gravitational Physics and have a top of the line video card you can help us using GPU processing at the Max Planck Institute (Einstein) and there you will see me.
It takes energy to make hydrogen. This isn't free energy. We'll still be using fossil fuels to make the fuel we need. But it will be a lot more efficient.
Eugen Krause remember that big yellow thing in the sky? It can easily make hydrogen fuel cells if Elon musk used his SolarCitys to do so. Zero footprint then.
+JRP3 Thank you for sharing your rationality and accuracy I really appreciate it. I think what we are seeing here today is tremendously instructive, if such a knowledgeable and inspiring man as Michio can publicly go ahead and make such false steps (athough it has it's own explanations: age, lack of experience in pragmatic fields, little megalomaniac;) ), I think the majority of us is in serious danger of taking wrong stances on whatever topics. All around the world, everyday, every moment, people constantly make choices and formulate opinions, but where are we going to end if people don't care about the possibility of being wrong???
So much wrong with this analysis. That hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe is irrelevant if it's difficult or expensive to extract it. We can't mine the sun, and the most viable way to extract it on earth is from fossil fuels. The only renewable way to get it is through electrolysis, using renewable electricity to break apart water molecules. The problem with that is it requires 3 times the energy that it takes to put an equivalent charge in a battery. Hydrogen being abundant doesn't make it cheap. It costs about the same as petrol. Charging electric cars is much cheaper. Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles have gone nowhere and it is going nowhere. They've been the next big thing for the last 50 years. It is not a viable technology and never will be.
fuel source? why? the very premise is flawed. plus, why the hell does abundance "in the universe" matter? what? we're going to fetch hydrogen from distant galaxies now? the largest hydrogen mass in our solar system is the sun, and its bathing the earth with pho... ..omg LOL this car has an acceleration of 60mph in 9 sec LOL, never mind, do go on about your hydrogen car ;p
Hydrogen can be extracted from the 1 Billion tons of waste biomass in the USA annually, at 75% efficiency, as well as from natural gas at similar efficiency, and we have decades if not a century worth of natural gas reserves. So, Hydrogen indeed is very abundance. Likewise, gasoline does not exist in nature, but must be extracted from crude oil at 85% efficiency.
Half the charging efficiency of a battery, much more complexity, less capable of high amperage, sure if you want to be a loser, invest in Hydrogen fuel cell cars.
🔴🟤⚫🗾🗾🗾I want to accuse Toyota (Toyota Motor Corporation President Akio Toyoda (豊田章男) of mass environmental pollution, ecocide and chemical genocide in Russia, organized by Toyota. Issuing a technical defect as a harmless breakdown, which led to the massive evaporation of gasoline and its leakage. Toyota sold 219,811 thousand vehicles in Russia with a defective fuel system, the scale of gasoline and gasoline fumes leaking into the atmosphere could be massive.The environment can be seriously damaged, and people can suffer from chemical poisoning from gasoline fumes.Gasoline fumes are especially dangerous for children.Similar environmental crime was committed in the US (Vapors of gasoline) トヨタ（トヨタ自動車株式会社豊田章男社長）がロシアで組織した大量の環境汚染、エコサイド、化学物質の大量殺戮を非難したい。技術的な欠陥を無害な故障として発行し、ガソリンの大量蒸発につながった トヨタはロシアで燃料システムに欠陥のある219,811千台の自動車を販売し、大気中に漏れるガソリンとガソリン蒸気の規模は膨大になる可能性があります。環境は深刻な被害を受け、人々はガソリン蒸気による化学汚染に苦しむ可能性があります。 ガソリンの蒸気は子供にとって特に危険です。同様の環境犯罪が米国で犯されました（ガソリンの蒸気） www.epa.gov/enforcement/toyota-motor-corporation-settlement?fbclid=IwAR2zjXWVkNkTRTm_KrauMppKn-7kAdNSHYQ77gramROkElK79oaGvuC7ufI 01
Electricty or Hydrogen ?. Lets see it like we see quantum entaglement, Bohr theory is right and Einstein spooky action at a distance is also right. So, Both right untill we able to reveal the truth.
It is too early to conclude this technology. It is like a crawling baby. Let's see whether Mirai proves the future or not. At least I bet on the world of zero emission, including EV.
This in response to Mahai Iliuta. You seem to not be aware that there are now three countries on the world that have converted to hydrogen with Norway being the first. It only took 3 years to build all the necessary facilities and another 2 years to get rid of Gasoline powered vehicles. As I am very familiar with the process of extracting hydrogen, I can tell you it takes very little energy to produce. You an do it at home with a simple battery. Did you not take basic science? I learned about electrolysis in grade school some 50 years ago. Hydrogen is the only real answer to all our needs for power. Hydrogen is the single most prolific element in the universe and it self sustaining and renewable without any help from us. The Scandinavian countries that have converted have shown that any country can become self reliant where fuel is concerned. You remind me of a high school student that claimed Hydrogen was an inefficient source of energy because it requires too much coal. That poor girl was so misinformed. One fuel station can produce thousands of "gallons" of hydrogen every day at a cost of about .11 cents to a gallon. Basically, there is enough hydrogen in a gallon of water to keep one vehicle running for an entire year. So, before you start whining about the cost and the infeasibility of a plan. do some research from reliable sources and make an intelligent argument. Hydrogen is the answer and I'll do my part to support a move in that direction.
I work at Tesla so I obviously feel different about what technology will drive the car of the future. However, I wish Toyota all the best. Regardless of whether you believe in biofuels, hydrogen or electricity like I do I feel we should all pursue our chosen passion with all the vigor we can muster. The more technology we can put into cars that doesn't require fossil fuels the better off all of us will be in the long run. :)
+Bromopar
Hahaha. If I worked at tesla and saw this blunder by Toyota, I'd be cheering them on with the kindest words as well.
Justin Crediblename
Lol...
17 or 18 years ago we heard the same about the first generation of prius.
I wonder what toyota knows that we don't know?
Between paied endorsements and you tube self proclaimed scientists, half truths are everywhere, and complete understanding are very rare.
hat's off mate. well said : cheers :))
toyota got software in powering electric my 2 cents. i hope they well open source it :)) cheers
Bromopar I'm investing in hydrogen fuel cells so we are in different paths but same goal, wish the best for you and your company my friend
toyota u got my respect ... drive the automotive industry towards future
you mean the past. who makes all the money from selling all that hydrogen,, just imagine yourself or anyone driving down the street and that high pressured hydrogen tank leaks. bunch of hindenbergs waiting to happen., if a battery ruptures the outcome is 99% less catastrophic.
ajbauto Wrong on so many levels. If hydrogen leaks form this vehicle, it recombines with the air and becomes water vapor. Learn about what actually made the Hindenburg blow up. It had nothing to do with the use of hydrogen putting aside 150 years of scientific advancement since then.
ajbauto x,,,
Hydrogen is lighter than air, if you have a leak it will go up instead of all over the ground like gasoline would. it will also dissipate a lot faster than gasoline. They had the same concerns when cars first came out. If we can increase the efficiency of the fuel cell, I can see it powering the future. But it won't happen till all the people that are getting rich on gas are in control of the hydrogen production also.
Hydrogen combining with air to form water is called "burning". As in "fire".
Also, the largest producers of hydrogen, with the cheapest source (steam reformed natural gas) are the oil companies. They plan to sell that profitable new fuel when oil gets too expensive.
Excellent presentation by Dr. Kaku. However, you need energy to create Hydrogen molecules.
Saad Nemeh
The future is not fuel, the future is radiant energy capture. Pure and simple. No refueling, no exhaust and all the things we want from a modern car. There is a way, an idea is all it takes.
ForceOfWizardry Will do.
Vl ne jw jw b sjjj
Toyota, EXCELLENT choice on letting Michio Kaku do the speaking, LOVE IT.
Letting? More like Michio here is a bunch of money, read the script we wrote for you at this event.
U know wat, the way of how Michio Kaku was talking really did make u damp eager want to buy that car. :D
I like dr. Michio Kaku, great celebrity professor.
yes, but this was bad, wrong,evil
@@JohnSmith-pn2vl what's wrong? Fcev's are working extremely well n Japan.
@@skiran69 because of 28.000 dollar incentive per car?
@@JohnSmith-pn2vl well.. next generation toyota fcev's range is 680 miles
@@skiran69 as if range is something anybody would care
Have the issues with fuel cells been resolved? I haven't seen them used used successfully outside a limited number of fork lifts and demonstration vehicles.
full ces 2015 toyota mirai conference when u will upload?
Dr. Kaku has become the Dr. Oz of theoretical physics.
Philip Davis +1000 That is the perfect analogy!
Can you get more energy out of the hydrogen than it takes to separate it and compress it? If you can, why not use the hydrogen at a stationary power plant to generate electric to charge BEV's? This would avoid all the concerns of high pressure tanks in vehicles that run the risk of being in accidents and seriously limits the whining about "infrastructure". If it takes more energy to separate out the hydrogen and compress it, isn't it a zero gain environmentally,; what energy source are they using to separate the hydrogen? Where is the hydrogen coming from, is it being stripped from fossil fuels? Many unanswered questions at this time. I say Toyota should go for it, but Governments need to not "Pick Winners" in the automotive game (and it is for sure a game).
if you could that would be free infinite energy, no you can't. it's nonsense technology, a giant fraud pushed by fossil fuel industry. 95% of Hydrogen is Fossil
Thank you from 'H2 Innovation Lab' H2IL - technology for a green sustainable hydrogen future.
I didn't expected this from a physicist
how much is a full tank of hydrogen cost to run 300 miles?
While I do like the idea of fuel cell technologies, I still prefer internal combustion for transportation. Hydrogen could also very easily be used in "regular engines" designed to burn hydrogen, rather than gasoline, as well.
In either case, the main benefit would be the ability to generate your own fuel with small, inexpensive personal/home hydrogen generators. If this is taken seriously enough, we could all replace our current gas or electric furnaces with hydrogen burning, or fuel-cell furnaces, even further reducing needless sources of pollution. While considering throwing a few solar panels on the roof to generate power to split hydrogen to fuel our cars and heat our homes, we could also have a few tanks to store hydrogen we didn't use "that day" and have our own reserves on hand, for when we DID need them.
Just thinking...
I am a fan of both Dr.Kaku and Elon Musk, I believe they are both expert in the engineering field. However, in a recent interview, I saw Elon Musk mocking the idea of Hydrogen cars, saying that it is not viable but in this video, Dr.kaku says otherwise. Can anyone tell me which one of them is right?
Be the customer. Customer is always right.
Currently petroleum is the major game changer in world economy then how will the world economy would be impacted if hydrogen vehicles replace the petroleum ones ?
Yea.. so revolutionary, and the carbon emissions for manufacturing the car by itself are outrageous!
I had my doubts about Michio Kaku being just a "brand". Not anymore.
Where the hydrogen fuel cell car fails is in economics. The per-mile cost of hydrogen fuel is higher than the per-mile cost of petroleum fuels, and nearly 5x the per-mile cost of driving electric. Hydrogen is more expensive than electricity, and always will be.
Then add in the higher cost compared to plug-in hybrids or battery electrics, and the conclusion is clear. The future is electric.
my man you came from the future too? i heard a hydrogen station blew up recently in our time? and tesla has taken over the world with this wondrous car called the model 3.
HFC cars are EVs
I would go with Tesla for now just because I'm a fan of spirited driving. At the same time I would like to see more of those hydrogen cars in the near future. Every direction which is going away from combustion engines is good. Hydrogen is one of them. It's easier to manufacture cars with electric engines that is why most companies are going that route. And it's all good. But people need to realize that time can make a big difference and if the sufficient effort would be made, hydrogen engines could be much, much better than they are today. I like that Toyota is going that route. Keep it up!
Patryk Cisowski sukisivam
The dawn of a new age upon us, this is the beginning of a new future!!! Imagine a airplane using this technology? or a train? how about a tractor trailer? yes, the damage done to our planet will be repaired, thank you guys, thank you so much, for sharing this technology to the world and showing that yes we can change for the better, for all of the engineers at Toyota, thank you
+emanolete caoarignion
...oh, you were serious.
No airplanes man. no airplanes.
0 to 60 in nine seconds whoa slow down Toyota
This is a good advertising for Toyota
i would argue that for Kaku to be willing to put his name on it, and Toyota to announce it they must be pretty close to a larger push on these. Also the largest problem for the hydrogen economy isn't getting energy from hydrogen or keeping it, its the storage size. Gasoline is much more compact compared to H2.
molecular hydrogen, unless we are just talking about loose protons? im not clear honestly i was making an assumption that may be wrong.but the arguement of a compact fuel source is still an issue.
...ya from what i've seen so far its H2, though you should always double check and don't just take my word on it....im by no means a master chemist
How much does it cost to fill the tank?
+king leighton if you buy the car from toyota it's free for 3 or 4 years, but then 50 bucks for a 300 mile fillup after that. This, keep in mind, is purchasing cheap hydrogen extracted from natural gas. When we start running short on natural gas, we're gonna have issues cuz then we'll have to extract it from water. Sure you can make natural gas from plant wastes and poop, but not THAT efficiently. And production of new natural gas is sorta not what a lot of these green tech buyers want to support.
*****
since it's finally entering the age of financial competitiveness, it will continually gain in popularity. It's really an exciting thing to watch. Energy independence is going to simplify the political atmosphere by reducing the influence of at least one corrupt industry over our people worldwide.
To add to my excitement, I just got ~9 kilowatts of salvageable sunpower e20 panels (20+% efficient) for free on craigslist the other day. Woooo! While I think the average californian would need about 22kw of solar to offset their entire energy footprint, it's at least a good start :p ...but I digress.
if there is a far more efficient way found in the future of performing electrolysis, then I think the primary problem associated with HFC vehicles will be solved and I feel it'll still be a viable replacement for hydrocarbon fuels. But currently, I agree, it's simply no good.
The funny thing is that it's very expensive to gain hydrogen using electrolysis of water. Most of the hydrogen used today is obtained from natural gas or crude oil...
Amazing to read the comments left by the high school educated skeptics... Makes me wonder why they are so against replacing gasoline with hydrogen. It certainly can not be because they understand the physics or chemistry involved.
No one is against replacing gasoline, but pure electric is a way better option for many reasons:
1. Hydrogen is 95% substracted from hydrocarbons which generates co2, the only difference is that it doesn't do it in the city but where hyd is produced
2. infrastructure to hyd ready society needs to be huge and built from scratch. on the other hand pure electric cars work with the existing electric network.
3. hydrogen is compressed to 700 bar or 10000 psi, do you realize how much pressure is that? is huge and a huge problem also in case of something going wrong
it's ok to develop alternatives, good for Toyota, but electric cars are just better
I'm not opposed to replacing gasoline, I just came to realize that electricity is a far better option to do that. Hydrogen costs a lot more than electricity on a per-mile fuel cost basis, and always will. Even when using the cheapest hydrogen source of steam reformed natural gas.
Hydrogen from electrolysis is even more expensive due to inefficiency - using electrolysis and compression for storage and fuel cells takes 3x more electrical energy than the equivalent charger and batteries.
Then add in a higher price for an equivalent fuel cell car, and the severe lack of hydrogen refueling stations, and the convenience of home recharging (not practical for hydrogen) and the answer is clear. The future is electric.
What is 345543-Element imaginary named Comic Quark?
1!=-1
It may be expensive and impractical now but so was the light bulb when it was invented. Times change.
I am hopeful to see at least we are finally discussing something besides fossil fuel as an energy source of the future. As with any energy source, there is waste, there is risk, there are unknown variables...I'll take pure oxygen vs smog any day. I respect Dr Michio and I am glad to see him supporting progress from fossil fuel dependency, Next is addressing smarter city planning to reduce commuting distances required to get from home to work, medical and retail services. Current city planning and design, "suburbs" are driving the need for more people to spend more time in cars. Better city/civilization design, smarter cars....renewed planet.
www.faculty.rsu.edu/users/c/clayton/www/tbenbrook/paper.htm - thank you James for what you wrote here because it lead me to exploration on the subject and what you explained is also outlined in this link I found. Makes me lean on your side about the scam bit.
***** Electric cars in most cases are technically still fossil fuel powered. Coal being used to power the majority of electricity plants. Also diggers mining lithium use oil and there is also the pollution problem. Nearly everything we use needs oil somewhere in the process. Who will win Hydrogen fuel cell or Battery? I don't know it may be another Vhs vs. Betamax.
Great points James - my Uncle and I just had this dialogue this morning. Every alternative fuel option has risk and as I'm learning, unfortunately many of them lead back to fossil fuels. "Yah got to give me more power Mr. Scott!" Man do we need more eco-minded Scotty's right now.(Star Trek ref)
damn, he sold out.
Sad.. but true
@@blerimlita1577 his face says it all🤣
People don't get the point of hydrogen technology. Nobody is promoting that you just get it everywhere for free. It is a means of storing energy. The problem of this world is not to get hold of energy in the first place but store it and transport it quickly an efficiently. So far that has been fossil fuel, which creates hugely harmful emissions and batteries which use materials that are very nasty to harvest and so small in number that you couldn't even supply 5% of people driving cars with an electric one. an electric car only becomes more ecological than a petrol powered one after 25000 miles of driving it due to the nasty manufacturing process of the batteries, which you will have to replace as well, because they wear out and lose capacity. So hydrogen technology is at the very least much more promising than electric cars with batteries.
CO2 engine is the one for the world energy need. It byproduct is cold temperature that can make fresh water and for cooling. It can operate with just 10 deg C heat or even lower. Dr Kaku, I like to pass this detail to you if I can contact you. CO2 engine is a world-changer!
How much did they pay you for this Kaku?
Big fan of you sir
Thank You Toyota for the MIRAI. Hydrogen is the way to go ASAP! ;-)
Never going to happen.
@@davidkeenan5642 FCEV's are the king.
@@skiran69
Maybe for rail, aircraft and marine transport, but not for personal transport or for short distance delivery vehicles.
There's both a need and a place for both in the future.
@@davidkeenan5642 even for daily USe, FCEV's are gonna replace. Tbh it's easier to convert gas stations into green hydrogen station than replacing the whole country's electric supply with green electricity.
Where do you get the hydrogen from? That's the real problem
Hydrogen is very flammable, hence it will be a really dangerous kind of fuel. Also, Hydrogen needs to be transported in really heavy containers which will make it quite unavailable in most places.
Honda introduced this car in 2014 and has then in California. The problem is getting refueling stations across the US, but I do think this is the future for cars and large scale data centers who could produce their own energy to power servers. automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarity/
Producing, compressing, and freezing hydrogen into liquid form wastes far more energy than electric cars do. And I would opt to charge on at least 20KW at home.
theoretical physicist and futurist Dr. Michio Kaku discusses a hydrogen future.
Its sad about all the nuclear waste that we never needed to create!
hydrogen extraction , transportation and infrasturcture problems
air polution in big cities like Bejing for ex. is life threatening so people who live in those areas should consider this proposal very serious...I vote for this car , also electric got my vote
Watching this video, I have to wonder if at the time that Edison and Ford made that bet that if battery powered cars won out, what it would be like today. In other words, would battery technology been way ahead of what it is today. I would guess probably so.
Dr. Michio Kaku never knew he was a puppet . or did he not know about batteries back in 2015
Battery's is a turd you can polish only that much. Humanity can do better than rely on hunderds of kilos chemical batterypacks.
So did Edyson and Ford agree on a specific date? Maybe on the long run, Edyson can still win that bet! :-D
No chance. Even nuclear fusion is more promising than battery.
Tesla groupie alert!!!!
Both will win the bet.
- Batterie for casual drivers, private persons with a limited action radius (~400 km), comapies, Tesla fanboys.
- Oxygen for busses, Trucks, companies, private persons with a long range action radius > 400 km who don't want to use electric trains.
Edison, not Edyson
@@ThorusCrusius Battery Semi has double range of hydrogen. Hydrogen is a giant fraud that cannot work at all.
Theres a lot wrong and missing from this video. Hydrogen is a very inefficient way of moving a vehicle.
This technology was developed in the 70's, but the inventor was unfortunately suppressed and his home with all of his inventions bought by the...government.
*It is about time since we have been talking about this for decades.
Reminds me of Edison stealing from Tesla
Be nice to update my 1970 Cutlass Supreme with the 455 to run on hydrogen fuel*
Losbukis
+semir kasumovic Not the only suppressed or high jacked technology. I remember seeing news articles in the 70's both on TV or in magazines about the amazing hydrogen cars. They even talked about fuel cells back then, but mostly hydrogen burned by ICE powered cars. There were also articles how Nuclear power plants could be converted to hydrogen not to mention other things. They talked about how coal could be burned cleanly, and later how it was too expensive.Look at the steel industry, Japan and Germany rebuilt their plants to newer technology after WWII with the help of the US. The steel industry was making big money in the US, so they saw no need to upgrade, they out produced everyone else, and sold so much steel, they could afford to sell it cheaper. In 20 years, the lack of technology upgrades caused them to loose ground quickly, their steel ended up costing more so the Japanese and Germans were able to make cheaper steel, hence cheaper cars. So let's get things moving and changing, otherwise it might be too late!.Diesel engines were NEVER intended to run on diesel fuel. Diesel fuel was invented FOR Diesel engines from petroleum products. Originally Rudolf Diesel use vegetable oil stating the nee for renewable energy. Herbert Stuart invented the first ICE to use a pressurized fuel injection system the precursor to the Diesel engine, and ran it on paraffin oil (similar to modern diesel fuel). So the petroleum companies HAD to find a way to fuel the Diesel, not hard since the precursor to the Diesel ran on paraffin. Renewable energy high jacked.With the canopy's over each gas stations pumps along with their roof space, why not put a roof the entire station front to back, side to side, and make the "roof" a bank of solar collectors. Use that to supplement any hydrogen trucked in. Better yet why not have under ground lines to resupply tanks at the filling stations?
Whatever... you guys are saying what we already know, But the fact that the elements in their most purest form still exist and still means that there is some form of possibility.
Yeah it would be cool to have like a cloud that pops up randomly in the sky every 14 hours and then suck it all down through a straw and put that hydrogen in a container and we can all be amazed to even hold and be thinking, "Oh the power!!"
Just like it would be cool to be playing with dinosaurs that could talk and think like humans and play around together, a pet that not only looked badass but a badass pet that we would possibly dream of considering that they did in fact exist.
I just want to ask some one who knows better, will it be safe E.g
If an accident happens and hydrogen tank got busted, leaking hydrogen and it got some fire and every body knows what will gonna happen next????
I wonder how soon they reach mass production! Game changer for sure😀👍
Really2 good... i wish to drive it one day.
*Hydrogen is not an energy source*. It's a form of storage. And a very poor one at that.
Batterypacks are even worse. considering the superhigh efficiency of electric cars and yet their range is poor depite the hunderds of kilo's batterypacks.
You guys must be in NASA
>Hydrogen is the most common atom in the universe
True, but they're found in stars and in gas clouds. Not so easy to extract on Earth.
great idea but we are not ready for this technology
I wonder how much Toyota paid Dr. Michio Kaku. As a physicist he is well aware about facts about hydrogen.
Yes hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe, but you do not have it on Earth in the form you need it, you only have it as part of other molecules. So you have to make it (from water, natural gas ...), and it takes much more energy (3 times more) to make it, than you get from it.
This makes hydrogen *energy storage (very poor one)* and *NOT energy source*.
For larger energy usages, like cars, hydrogen does not make sense.
First, they are promoting hydrogen as alternative to fossil fuels, and 95% of
hydrogen coming from FOSSIL fuels (natural gas)! Mostly from
*FRACKING*. So hydrogen does not solve environment issues (unless you
think fracking is good for environment), and nobody will produce
hydrogen on large scale with electrolysis while cheaper alternative is
available.
As for getting hydrogen from water, for hydrogen you
have to put in 100kWh of energy to get 23kWh to move the car. In EV, for
100kWh, you get 70kWh to move the car. So hydrogen station creating
hydrogen on site will use so much electricity that it could charge 3-4
times more electric vehicles. For example, electricity used to fill up
1000 fuel cell vehicles for 300 miles, could fill up 3000 electric
vehicles for the same mileage each.
Price: 50$ for 300 miles? That is more expensive than a petrol car, and this is with 'cheap' hydrogen that is coming from fossil fuels, it can only get more expensive.
Who loves hydrogen? Big oil companies, because they produce it from fossil
fuels, and fuel cell cars would let them keep their monopoly.
You can say, we will put solar panels, wind turbine or any other renewable
and make hydrogen that way for 'free', but that also does not make
sense, because with the same solar panels or wind turbines you can
support 3-4 times more electric than hydrogen vehicles.
One does not simply pay a world class leading Theoretical Physicist to lie.
Howard Sterling Toyota's marketing strategy seems to be working. Just saying.
+Sasoon2006 You are correct that converting water into hydrogen using electric is inefficient. However, electric cars take time to charge, and people don't always have time to wait. You are however wrong about needing fracking to make hydrogen. A man in the mid-west needed electric for his home. He was so far from the nearest power line it was going to cost thousands of dollars to get electricity run to his house. He researched solar power, and found for only a small amount more he could have a fully functional power plant of his own. He heats and provides electricity for his home from solar. Since he can not return unused power to the grid, he went with hydrogen. Solar power is stored as hydrogen, which he has a couple huge tanks. When he has no sun due to over cast skies, he uses fuel cells to convert it back. He makes so much hydrogen with his solar cells he has now converted his cars to burn hydrogen. He recovered the price he paid for the system in the first few years of use, and now does not rely of OPEC for fueling his cars or the electric companies for powering his house. Besides $50 for 300 miles ain't bad, I presently pay between $43.17 - $46.67 in gas to drive 300 miles now. Gas cost $2.59-2.80, I use 1 gal to go 18 miles. 300/18=16.66666666666667. Next multiply 2.59 or 2.80 times 16.66666666666667 and the result is either $43.17 or 46.67. Back when gas was $3.69 we were paying $61.5 to go 300 miles!
+Howard Sterling Apparently someone does... But, thank god no one ever crashes their cars into other cars, otherwise we'd be running the risk of damaging a tank full of hydrogen - a highly volatile substance.
+Walter Green I use 1 gallon of gas to go 30 miles...while towing a 17 foot flatbed trailer. This is with a 1000 dollar car that needs 300 in yearly maintenance, costs less than 40 dollars a month to insure, and has cheap registration.
I'm not feeling a hydrogen bug right now.
Just curious with the waste being water, where does it go? It would turn to ice in the weather we are having 😂
Closed chapter
0-60 in 9 seconds????!!! NO!
George Olah was right about the Methanol economy. So, yes it uses hydrogen, but in a totally different way.
Love Dr. Michio Kaku, and love Toyota for making this car.
+Mr Cabot temrrqggt
Mr Cabot
More posturing and few facts and honest perspective
Battery is what will be main stream not hydrogen
Acceleration from 0-60 in 9 seconds. Yeah that's game charger indeed.
Go Pure Battery Electric Instead of still wasting time on Hydrogen and Hybrids for Cars.
No. Toyota makes billions from hybrid cars
100 years from now
Put 10 million H-cars on the road and the roads will be all ways be wet.
Slippery when wet sign will be placed every where.
Need some cold and the road turns into ice!
Nice to know Dr. Kaku can be bought too. The future is electric. Forget the oil and diesel infrastructure middlemen. 9 sec? Try 3 to 6 on electrics. Let's all put the refineries out of business...
If the electricity required to electrolyse water is generated by coal-fired power like you think to do in USA ...It is a bad choice :-( but in Quebec, Canada, we are already producing green hydrogen using Hydro Electric Power..:-) So from water in our rivers to Hydrogen in our vehicules to water in our streets...:-) This is the only future for Humanity...and Japan & China could be the leaders in the car industry for this to happen...:-) Love U all :-)
corpusien No, it is still a bad choice. It takes more energy to produce the hydrogen than it would to charge equivalent batteries. Therefore, regardless of the energy source, you are wasting it by using it to make hydrogen. And that is based on the best theoretical efficiency of hydrogen production and use compared to today's batteries. Hydrogen is up against fundamental barriers, while batteries keep improving each year.
Cool
Stanley Meyer invented this in the 1970's
This video brought to you by Exxon Mobile.
Isn't this a good idea? I mean toyota... Toyota produces a lot of cars a day. Which means within just less than 1 month, Toyota would be a millionaire for sure... Of course I would 100% buy it because it doesn't pollute. In fact, hydrogen in the universe is like... infinite!
About 95% of Hydrogen production is from natural gas and the significant byproduct of that process is carbon monoxide. So that's a really bad idea from an environmental standpoint. Production via hydrolysis is equally problematic as it is very inefficient with only 25% of the electrical energy input realised from the resulting hydrogen fuel. Given the huge infrastructure investment required (literally trillions) for production, distribution, fuel stations etc and taking into account the current and forthcoming tech advances for battery EVs then hydrogen is basically dead in the water. Very few of us will be driving hydrogen vehicles in the future.
Electric cars still seem like a better idea. Thought call though.
60mph in 9 seconds? That's terrible?
Dr. Michio Kaku is a great speaker but the Toyota Mirai isn't able to charge in 3 to 5 minutes because there isn't any refilling stations around the World to support utopia. 1 hydrogen refilling stations costs roundabout 1 to 2 million dollars. how many gasolin stations are around the world? 80k to 120 k maybe more. this is unpossible
Don't worry, the world-wide Hydrogen Council plans to invest $10.7 Billion in the next 5 years to build out Hydrogen infrastructures. A Hydrogen station will come to a place near you.
Toyota: Let's Go Backwards
Bring on the clean tech. Sweet!
awesome! No more global warming
So we will make cows that eat hydrogen fuel to lower the Co2??
Global Warming lmao........is that you again Al Gore??
Didn't you notice that they never talk about hydrogen production, and they only mention how only thing coming out is water.
Do you know where hydrogen is coming from?
95% of it is coming from natural gas (is fracking good for environment?), creating load of CO2 in the process.
Rani Hinnawi
I am a physicist who mathematically found (theoretical physics) that I shouldn't have made a comment here because now every day I get another email about Michio's youtube video and the subject.
And I rarely have time for this since I have been working for CERN since 2004
Maybe everyone on this thread should donate their computers to us or the Max Planck Institute of Gravitational Physics (I start my 11th year there on the 18th of January)
Especially on UA-cam
Here is some wiki for you though
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_wave
*****
No way would I post my legal name on a UA-cam thread.....but if you are interested in quantum mechanics,cosmology,or high-energy physics and have a good pc stop by vLHC or Atlas and I will set you up or Gravitational Physics and have a top of the line video card you can help us using GPU processing at the Max Planck Institute (Einstein) and there you will see me.
Hydrogen fuel cells are great! I just need a hydrogen generating source.
This Technology is Over, TEsla and battery is the future.
Tesla, and all the other car manufacturers that Elon has spurred into action.
It takes energy to make hydrogen. This isn't free energy. We'll still be using fossil fuels to make the fuel we need. But it will be a lot more efficient.
Eugen Krause remember that big yellow thing in the sky? It can easily make hydrogen fuel cells if Elon musk used his SolarCitys to do so. Zero footprint then.
hydrogen = inefficient energy source
.....but available as a reliable supply of fuel - efficiency no concern here
Sold out physicist 👨🔬
+JRP3 Thank you for sharing your rationality and accuracy I really appreciate it. I think what we are seeing here today is tremendously instructive, if such a knowledgeable and inspiring man as Michio can publicly go ahead and make such false steps (athough it has it's own explanations: age, lack of experience in pragmatic fields, little megalomaniac;) ), I think the majority of us is in serious danger of taking wrong stances on whatever topics. All around the world, everyday, every moment, people constantly make choices and formulate opinions, but where are we going to end if people don't care about the possibility of being wrong???
he's wrong. hydrogen is not most abundant in universe.
It's DARK MATTER.
Therefore, the future of fuel MUST be dark matter!
-genius logic-master.
Justin Crediblename +
we must create dark matter first..
This is actually true.
So much wrong with this analysis.
That hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe is irrelevant if it's difficult or expensive to extract it. We can't mine the sun, and the most viable way to extract it on earth is from fossil fuels. The only renewable way to get it is through electrolysis, using renewable electricity to break apart water molecules. The problem with that is it requires 3 times the energy that it takes to put an equivalent charge in a battery.
Hydrogen being abundant doesn't make it cheap. It costs about the same as petrol. Charging electric cars is much cheaper.
Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles have gone nowhere and it is going nowhere. They've been the next big thing for the last 50 years. It is not a viable technology and never will be.
An other genius knocking NASA doors
fuel source? why? the very premise is flawed. plus, why the hell does abundance "in the universe" matter? what? we're going to fetch hydrogen from distant galaxies now? the largest hydrogen mass in our solar system is the sun, and its bathing the earth with pho... ..omg LOL this car has an acceleration of 60mph in 9 sec LOL, never mind, do go on about your hydrogen car ;p
Hydrogen can be extracted from the 1 Billion tons of waste biomass in the USA annually, at 75% efficiency, as well as from natural gas at similar efficiency, and we have decades if not a century worth of natural gas reserves. So, Hydrogen indeed is very abundance.
Likewise, gasoline does not exist in nature, but must be extracted from crude oil at 85% efficiency.
thanks wolfwood62 for the reply.
So in Dubai. Tons of Hydrogen while make oil derivates, without polution.
Half the charging efficiency of a battery, much more complexity, less capable of high amperage, sure if you want to be a loser, invest in Hydrogen fuel cell cars.
awesome car !
and i can't get enough of Dr.Michio Kaku.... love the hair !
🔴🟤⚫🗾🗾🗾I want to accuse Toyota (Toyota Motor Corporation President Akio Toyoda (豊田章男) of mass environmental pollution, ecocide and chemical genocide in Russia, organized by Toyota. Issuing a technical defect as a harmless breakdown, which led to the massive evaporation of gasoline and its leakage. Toyota sold 219,811 thousand vehicles in Russia with a defective fuel system, the scale of gasoline and gasoline fumes leaking into the atmosphere could be massive.The environment can be seriously damaged, and people can suffer from chemical poisoning from gasoline fumes.Gasoline fumes are especially dangerous for children.Similar environmental crime was committed in the US (Vapors of gasoline)
トヨタ（トヨタ自動車株式会社豊田章男社長）がロシアで組織した大量の環境汚染、エコサイド、化学物質の大量殺戮を非難したい。技術的な欠陥を無害な故障として発行し、ガソリンの大量蒸発につながった トヨタはロシアで燃料システムに欠陥のある219,811千台の自動車を販売し、大気中に漏れるガソリンとガソリン蒸気の規模は膨大になる可能性があります。環境は深刻な被害を受け、人々はガソリン蒸気による化学汚染に苦しむ可能性があります。 ガソリンの蒸気は子供にとって特に危険です。同様の環境犯罪が米国で犯されました（ガソリンの蒸気）
www.epa.gov/enforcement/toyota-motor-corporation-settlement?fbclid=IwAR2zjXWVkNkTRTm_KrauMppKn-7kAdNSHYQ77gramROkElK79oaGvuC7ufI
01
9 secs 0-60. No thanks... Tesla doing it right.
lets see how tesla gets raped by 30k toyota in corners
I love it. Too bad it's freakin ugly.
Electricty or Hydrogen ?. Lets see it like we see quantum entaglement, Bohr theory is right and Einstein spooky action at a distance is also right. So, Both right untill we able to reveal the truth.
HYDROGEN IS NOT THE FUTURE.
Remember my words..
Gcs
It is too early to conclude this technology. It is like a crawling baby.
Let's see whether Mirai proves the future or not.
At least I bet on the world of zero emission, including EV.
Meh, hydrogen and battery is the way to go. Trains use hybrid... soooo...
This in response to Mahai Iliuta. You seem to not be aware that there are now three countries on the world that have converted to hydrogen with Norway being the first. It only took 3 years to build all the necessary facilities and another 2 years to get rid of Gasoline powered vehicles. As I am very familiar with the process of extracting hydrogen, I can tell you it takes very little energy to produce. You an do it at home with a simple battery. Did you not take basic science? I learned about electrolysis in grade school some 50 years ago. Hydrogen is the only real answer to all our needs for power. Hydrogen is the single most prolific element in the universe and it self sustaining and renewable without any help from us. The Scandinavian countries that have converted have shown that any country can become self reliant where fuel is concerned. You remind me of a high school student that claimed Hydrogen was an inefficient source of energy because it requires too much coal. That poor girl was so misinformed. One fuel station can produce thousands of "gallons" of hydrogen every day at a cost of about .11 cents to a gallon. Basically, there is enough hydrogen in a gallon of water to keep one vehicle running for an entire year. So, before you start whining about the cost and the infeasibility of a plan. do some research from reliable sources and make an intelligent argument. Hydrogen is the answer and I'll do my part to support a move in that direction.
No free lunches. We do not have surplus of Oxygen either.
Oxygen is not consumed by this process. Both at production and at consumption, oxygen is liberated. Electrolysis and reverse-electrolysis.
It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again.