this post was submitted on 01 Mar 2024
233 points (96.0% liked)

Technology

59422 readers
3197 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Toyota wants hydrogen to succeed so bad it’s paying people to buy the Mirai::Toyota is offering some amazing deals for its hydrogen fuel cell-powered Mirai. That is, if customers can find the hydrogen to power it.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 58 points 8 months ago (3 children)

That is, if customers can find the hydrogen to power it.

That'd be my big concern; where tf would you re-fuel it?

There one single hydrogen fuel station in each of the two major cities near me.

[–] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 14 points 8 months ago

They just announced they’re shutting down some in California.

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 5 points 8 months ago (3 children)

To be fair, EV's had that same obstacle, and have pretty much overcome it.

[–] BastingChemina@slrpnk.net 24 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I disagree, EV are the exact opposite. Electricity was EVERYWHERE even before the EV were a thing.

A regular plug can charge an electric car and for few thousands $ you can install an 11 or 22kW charger.

Hydrogen on the other hand is extremely hard to store and transport. Unlike electricity the hydrogen production is very limited right now and full of unknown.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I don't think they're the same at all. Electricity distribution is practically everywhere already. Even if you need fast charging, setting it up in comparison to setting up a petrol or especially a hydrogen station, is extremely easy and extremely cheap, relatively speaking.

One hydrogen station cost millions to install. People assume based on the appearance that they'd be like a petrol station, but it's actually a fair bit more of an engineering challenge. Plus there's shitloads of costly red tape surrounding them (because hydrogen go boom if you're not careful).

[–] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 7 points 8 months ago

As did ICE vehicles when they came on the scene. People seem to get really upset that manufacturers are exploring multiple possibilities rather than all of them collectively deciding on a single option as if everyone in the country drives the same car and has the same needs.

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 27 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (3 children)
[–] hperrin@lemmy.world 33 points 8 months ago (4 children)

And most electricity is still made from fossil fuels. The point is that it doesn’t have to be, unlike gasoline.

[–] mutant_zz@lemmy.world 15 points 8 months ago

Depends where you live. Plenty of countries with high % of renewables

[–] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 5 points 8 months ago (4 children)

Yup, I think there is a solid argument BEVs will win in the long run (once battery technology improves ... all the downsides of BEVs start disappearing rapidly). However, I haven't ever liked the argument that "most hydrogen is made from fossil fuels" that's looking too short term.

[–] baru@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)

However, I haven't ever liked the argument that "most hydrogen is made from fossil fuels" that's looking too short term.

There's loads of studies surrounding that. It isn't expected to change. This because they're planning to create hydrogen from gas in such amounts that it'll not cause too much of a change in the percentage of green hydrogen (which is currently as good as non existant).

Hydrogen is also expensive, so it's pretty difficult to get a factory (e.g. steel factory) to switch to hydrogen.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] nexusband@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)

That's not true, Gasoline doesn't have to be made from Fossile fuels either. It's pretty easy to make actually - there are a number of European companies doing it and with the Co2 Taxes, it will be a viable option by 2028.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] cosmicrookie@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

We could use wind electricity, instead of stopping the windnturbines when the production gets so high that prices drop...

At some point hopefully we will realize

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (7 children)

it is however extremely easy to make from water. Making the switch to green easy and seamless, and it will surely happen if there's demand.

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago

It might be theoretically easy, but the massive power demands (and loss) make it pretty hard in practice.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] profdc9@lemmy.world 17 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I think the hydrogen is intended to be sourced from natural gas, which is not a great thing. The only way I see this working in an environmentally sustainable way is an efficient means of solar hydrolysis (much more efficient than photosynthesis).

[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It's important to see where the hydrogen is being sourced from. Grey Hydrogen comes from natural gas and is not ideal as you point out.

Green hydrogen is promising however, and comes from electrolyzers. The key there is where the electricity to operate them comes from, but that's true for electric vehicles as well. It seems an unfair criticism against hydrogen vehicles to hold that against them when the same isn't done for electric vehicles.

In any case, I think we do want to build out hydrogen infrastructure (and I'm biased since I work in hydrogen energy). The future we're envisioning is one where solar and wind provide us excesses fairly often. That's where it's perfect to run electrolyzers to store the energy as hydrogen.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BestBouclettes@jlai.lu 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah one of the big downsides of hydrogen is that you need massive amounts of clean energy to make it worthwhile.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] csm10495@sh.itjust.works 15 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Considering I have no hydrogen stations within a 100 mile radius, if they give me the car I would only get one tank out of it.

[–] OutlierBlue@lemmy.ca 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You could fill the tank with the hot air from the pro-hydrogen crowd.

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

We must compress them first

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 14 points 8 months ago (9 children)

In the near term, it’s pretty clear that zero-emission, light-duty vehicles will need to rely on batteries. So why are Toyota and Honda (and Hyundai and others) still so bullish on hydrogen?

To some degree, it’s like they wanted to invest in an image of being climate-conscious and technologically innovative while eschewing electric vehicles — the most common vision of a low-emissions transportation future.

Why is this article so agressively angled?

While it's clear the infrastructure isn't there right now, isn't hydrogen in the long term a clearly better alternative than ev's? The biggest problem with EV's being the battery, with all the horrible chemicals that go in to making them.

Shouldn't hydrogen, in the long term, be the obviously greener alternative, or am I missing something?

[–] DreadPotato@sopuli.xyz 37 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (9 children)

Hydrogen is incredibly inefficient compared to using electricity directly. You have to first use the electricity to make the hydrogen, this is very inefficient in itself. then you have to "burn" it to drive the vehicle, which wastes most of the energy just like ICE vehicle. So you need several times the initial energy generation to drive a hydrogen vehicle the same distance compared to using electricity directly.

Of course the batteries is then the issue when it comes to EVs, so they're not a magic bullet. But I wouldn't say hydrogen is the obvious better choice either since it is so wasteful with the energy.

[–] cosmicrookie@lemmy.world 11 points 8 months ago (1 children)

In a conference that in attended, they talked about usbhavimg to look at energy sources like a flow of energy and not as limited sources.

Currently, wind turbines are imtemtionally stopped, when there is so much wind that the generated electricity becomes too cheap to sell!

Instead, you could run them and use the electricity to convert the energy into hydrogen. Yes some energy is lost but it would be lost anyway as wind

With wind, sun, wave energy, we can look at energy in different ways that we usually do with fuel and coal. It's there and it just keeps coming.

[–] DreadPotato@sopuli.xyz 15 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

Yes but the overhead we have is nothing compared to the energy needed to make everything hydrogen powered. we would need an absolute absurd amount of overhead to generate all the hydrogen from overhead alone.

It's kind of dumb to intentionally waste 75-80% of the total electric energy initially generated to power hydrogen vehicles.

Using hydrogen to store the occasional grid overhead to be used for the grid later is a great idea, it should absolutely be done ASAP...but it's not a solution to hydrogen powered vehicles.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 4 points 8 months ago

Oh, that's a good reason, I didn't know that.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 14 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)

Hydrogen cannot be greener than an EV, because it's just an EV with more steps. It's energy intensive to turn electricity + water to hydrogen, transport it, pump it, then convert it back to electricity.

The losses from simply running electrons through a wire are very small.

It is physically impossible for hydrogen cars to ever be as green as EVs. In order to do so you'd have to break laws of physics.

E: ok people. You live in your little fantasy world where thermodynamics aren't a thing.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Thrella@lemmy.world 11 points 8 months ago

Honestly, the article answers its own question and acts oblivious to it, but I've been saying it for years.

It's for boats. The easiest and most convenient place to store hydrogen is near a port, which conveniently also generally has the infrastructure for natural gas, used to make hydrogen.

Honda and Toyota do make EVs, as does Hyundai, as well as patents for batteries, which would put them near the top of the market. Clearly, they're also betting on BEV cars. But they all also have a marine sector, and Toyota just partnered with a company to test out fuel cells for marine applications. The cars might as well have been a useful test bed which had its costs subsidized by consumers. Seems pretty clear what their angle is.

Or maybe they're out of their mind. Who knows?

[–] jabjoe@feddit.uk 9 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

In H2 car the H2 is just a really inefficient battery. Sure it can hold a lot, but it loses a lot. You lose it in energy conversions (to H2 and from H2) and you have to transport the stuff, and it leaks (smallest element) and it has to be cooled and compressed.

Battery tech is getting all the time, and really, you only need 300 mile range (many have that now) as humans have to stop for a rest/wee. With a charge network like or petrol network, you can charge then.

Edit: English

[–] Wahots@pawb.social 8 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Hydrogen is good when it's green hydrogen- made via electrolysis. Blue hydrogen is produced by gas companies, so it isn't clean, unfortunately. There are some other snags, such as designing a really hard gas tank that cannot be punctured, and hydrogen storage is a bit challenging. It's less dense than gasoline, particularly at normal temps. So it has to be cooled down, which takes additional power and delivery complications, and it's still less dense even as a liquid, so you don't get as far of a range vs gasoline or jet fuel.

Hydrogen storage as a battery medium for overproducing wind, solar, even solar towers might make sense. I, for one am excited about the idea of hydrogen blimps coming back for lifting heavy loads to remote places, which Canada is toying with right now.

Hydrogen might make sense for something like container ships, but short term, I think other efuels will be used for things like planes, buses, trucks, maybe cars. Stuff that is more inert or just less expensive to design across a supply chain. It also has potential offworld uses in the further future. It definitely has its uses, it just seems a bit difficult in personal vehicles.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Alpha71@lemmy.world 13 points 8 months ago

I would assume this falls into the "you couldn't pay me" category for most people.

[–] QuandaleDingle@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

I don't have a single hydrogen station here in Michigan. (There might be one in Detroit.) Meanwhile, I can plug in my electric car at home, or go to a public charger 10 miles away. Hydrogen's good as dead. At least to me, anyway.

[–] Chriswild@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

Hydrogen was as good as dead for years because compressing it is so wasteful

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CalcProgrammer1@lemmy.ml 7 points 8 months ago

I am not in love with the idea of pure hydrogen cars due to the inefficiencies involved, but I can see a hydrogen/BEV plug in hybrid being a good option if hydrogen infrastructure gets built out. As is, I drive a Chevy Volt, and while its battery range is low it is enough for the majority of my daily driving. The biggest downside of pure EVs is charging time when you're driving on long trips, and in my Volt I don't have to worry about that as I can just fill up with gas. Well, do the same thing but with hydrogen rather than gasoline and you have a car that can refill quickly like a gas car but can be powered entirely from renewable energy sources like a pure BEV. You need some lithium but less than you would for a full size battery. You still have the capability to charge at home and assuming the battery can do a reliable 50 miles or so you would only need hydrogen for longer trips. You could leave the hydrogen tank empty to avoid leakage and safety issues when you aren't doing a road trip. Also, hydrogen cars are EVs anyways so the drivetrain doesn't need the extra complexity of a conventional hybrid, just switch power between the battery and hydrogeb fuel cell.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 6 points 8 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Granted, the oil company only had seven to begin with (five of which had been out of order), but that still represents more than 10% of the Golden State’s stations, nearly all of which are clustered around Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Just don’t tell Honda, which recently found the time to convert its best-selling CR-V into an automotive equivalent of Frankenstein’s monster: a plug-in hybrid, fuel-cell vehicle.

The crossover’s 17.7 kWh battery provides 29 miles of electric-only range, and once that’s spent, the front-mounted fuel cell starts sipping hydrogen from a pair of carbon-fiber tanks.

Now, hydrogen has great potential as a fuel source for many parts of a carbon-free economy, from industrial heat to steel production and long-distance shipping.

To some degree, it’s like they wanted to invest in an image of being climate-conscious and technologically innovative while eschewing electric vehicles — the most common vision of a low-emissions transportation future.

If today’s hydrogen startups succeed, and if they’re able to build enough capacity to satiate industrial and shipping demand, then it might make sense to start selling fuel-cell vehicles to the masses.


The original article contains 810 words, the summary contains 185 words. Saved 77%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

load more comments
view more: next ›