Yeah, but he’s right about that part. Hybrid cars are just BEVs with more steps that can’t be recharged at home. Maybe useful for planes and other specific applications. Dumb for cars.
You do not have to hand it to Elon Musk. If home charging is the big benefit of BEVs, then why do “fast” charging stations have to get built everywhere? Tesla et al are just enshittifying refueling!
I don’t know how the mineral ingredients of a fuel cell stack compare to a lithium battery, but assuming they’re the same, a fuel cell vehicle has significantly less of them. For example, the fuel cell stack in the Toyota Mirai weighs about 19kg and is complemented with a battery that weighs 45kg (1, 2). In comparison, the Tesla Model 3 carries a battery weighing 480kg. Therefore, a BEV has about 6.5x as much stuff of questionable origin (and questionable disposal requirements) as a FCEV.
As the transportation sector electrifies, how can you be so sure that the GHG-free portion of the grid’s electricity mix will stay the same or improve? Why wouldn’t the fossil fuels that currently power our vehicle fleet follow the demand and shift to powering the grid? BEVs only make a small portion of the cars on the road, but there’s evidence that this shift is already happening. So, while it might currently be the case that the hydrogen powering an FCEV was derived from natural gas, it’s also certainly possible that your BEV is effectively running on coal. I’m not trying to knock BEVs here. Rather, I’m making the point that the problem you’ve raised is one of energy policy, not FCEVs. Relying on BEVs to mitigate our current energy policy, instead of correcting the policy, is just going to create new problems.
As for recycling battery packs, yes, I’m aware that it’s a thing, but it’s not pretty. The best course is to minimize the amount of battery that needs to be dealt with in the first place.
A month after the Business Journal article, a Harris Ranch spokesperson confirmed that Tesla did set up diesel generators to power Superchargers for a time. So, it’s a thing that happens. Regardless, the point is that the energy in the gasoline and diesel fuel that goes into most of the fleet will still have to come from somewhere and there are no policies to make sure it comes from GHG-free sources.
Funny thing is that EVs are still cleaner than ICE even when powered by a Coal grid
If it’s not a problem for BEVs to run on electricity derived from coal, then it shouldn’t be a problem for FCEVs to run on hydrogen derived from natural gas. What I’m saying is that it doesn’t really matter how the energy from coal or natural gas eventually gets consumed. It’s a separate issue that we simply shouldn’t be burning any of that stuff.
Hydrogen is definitely interesting for the future but is currently used by the oil industry to stall the transition away from gas. On top of that, almost all hydrogen making its way to market is dirty.
We can think about hydrogen and the mountains of infrastructure it needs after the oil barons are all dead.
I don’t think transitioning to either predominantly BEVs or hydrogen powered vehicles really affects the energy mix since the electricity to charge BEVs also comes from natural gas. That said, the infrastructure to support fast charging for a predominantly BEV fleet isn’t there either, especially for cargo trucks.
Most of the hydrogen on market is made with methane.
EVs use whatever source is being given, and most of these sources are converting to renewables.
Not comparable imo.
It’s also worth noting that EVs can be charged at home. Fast charging isn’t necessary for most and it’s silly to pretend like hydrogen doesn’t need its own distribution network. It’s a lot more complicated to set up a hydrogen refilling station than a fast charging one and you can’t fully fill your hydrogen over night by plugging it into your wall outlet.
Most of the hydrogen on market is made with methane.
EVs use whatever source is being given, and most of these sources are converting to renewables.
Not comparable imo.
As I explained in this reply, you can’t count on the grid’s energy mix improving or not getting worse as the vehicle fleet transitions to BEV. What you identify as a problem with FCEVs is really just bad energy policy that BEVs don’t solve either.
I actually kind of agree with you that the ideal BEV requires barely any new infrastructure. It should have a small battery that can support a daily commute and errands with slow charging at home overnight or during the day at work. Yet somehow these “fast” charging stations, which aren’t as fast or convenient as regular gas stations (and still run at least partially on fossil fuels anyway), have to get built everywhere. If we can’t get rid of these stations then let them be hydrogen stations.
you can’t count on the grid’s energy mix improving or not getting worse as the vehicle fleet transitions to BEV.
That is a possibility but they have already corrupted hydrogen. Between the two, I will go with the one that can go either way. There’s also the fact that EVs are being produced now while hydrogen car production is still a way off, so it’s a stall tactic as well
Yet somehow these “fast” charging stations, which aren’t as fast or convenient as regular gas stations (and still run at least partially on fossil fuels anyway), have to get built everywhere. If we can’t get rid of these stations then let them be hydrogen stations.
They can also be set up anywhere and are much more convenient, I’ve seen quite a few in residential streets, companies can set them up in their parking lots, etc. You can’t treat a compressed gas the same way, even if it’s just the canisters. It willl require much more investment in our infrastructure and conversion isn’t straight forward.
I think it’s cool tech but in our situation and looking at our current needs, pushing for hydrogen right now is a pipe dream fueld by the oil industry.
This is mostly for the car industry though, the same doesn’t necessarily hold for the industrial sector.
We need hydrogen powered vehicles just to spite this guy, if nothing else.
If you want to spite this guy, ride a bus.
Or a train. He realllly hates trains. If they’re not in stupid-ass evacuated tubes and separated into pods, that is.
Techbros love reinventing trains https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5M7Oq1PCz4
I knew it was gonna be Adam Something, lol. That dude has the best Elon roasts.
And a train can even be greener than his silly cars with direct electrification via 3rd rail or overhead catenary.
That’s fair, but Musk has specifically complained about FCEVs before.
Yeah, but he’s right about that part. Hybrid cars are just BEVs with more steps that can’t be recharged at home. Maybe useful for planes and other specific applications. Dumb for cars.
You do not have to hand it to Elon Musk. If home charging is the big benefit of BEVs, then why do “fast” charging stations have to get built everywhere? Tesla et al are just enshittifying refueling!
What
You do know that nearly all fuel cell vehicles also use lithium and a battery pack, as well the fuel cell it self uses a number of rare earth metals.
I don’t know how the mineral ingredients of a fuel cell stack compare to a lithium battery, but assuming they’re the same, a fuel cell vehicle has significantly less of them. For example, the fuel cell stack in the Toyota Mirai weighs about 19kg and is complemented with a battery that weighs 45kg (1, 2). In comparison, the Tesla Model 3 carries a battery weighing 480kg. Therefore, a BEV has about 6.5x as much stuff of questionable origin (and questionable disposal requirements) as a FCEV.
The FCEV is going to be fueled from fossil fuels for the foreseeable future
Today, about 95% of all hydrogen is produced from steam reforming of natural gas.
https://www.energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/hydrogen-fuel-basics#:~:text=Today%2C about 95%25 of all,steam reforming of natural gas.
EV battery packs however can be nearly fully recycled back into more batteries.
https://blog.ucsusa.org/jessica-dunn/how-are-ev-batteries-actually-recycled/
As the transportation sector electrifies, how can you be so sure that the GHG-free portion of the grid’s electricity mix will stay the same or improve? Why wouldn’t the fossil fuels that currently power our vehicle fleet follow the demand and shift to powering the grid? BEVs only make a small portion of the cars on the road, but there’s evidence that this shift is already happening. So, while it might currently be the case that the hydrogen powering an FCEV was derived from natural gas, it’s also certainly possible that your BEV is effectively running on coal. I’m not trying to knock BEVs here. Rather, I’m making the point that the problem you’ve raised is one of energy policy, not FCEVs. Relying on BEVs to mitigate our current energy policy, instead of correcting the policy, is just going to create new problems.
As for recycling battery packs, yes, I’m aware that it’s a thing, but it’s not pretty. The best course is to minimize the amount of battery that needs to be dealt with in the first place.
Shift? Dude that article has been debunked already.
https://thebusinessjournal.com/blog-harris-ranch-sets-record-straight-on-diesel-powered-tesla-supercharger-allegations/
Funny thing is that EVs are still cleaner than ICE even when powered by a Coal grid
https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikescott/2020/03/30/yes-electric-cars-are-cleaner-even-when-the-power-comes-from-coal/
A month after the Business Journal article, a Harris Ranch spokesperson confirmed that Tesla did set up diesel generators to power Superchargers for a time. So, it’s a thing that happens. Regardless, the point is that the energy in the gasoline and diesel fuel that goes into most of the fleet will still have to come from somewhere and there are no policies to make sure it comes from GHG-free sources.
If it’s not a problem for BEVs to run on electricity derived from coal, then it shouldn’t be a problem for FCEVs to run on hydrogen derived from natural gas. What I’m saying is that it doesn’t really matter how the energy from coal or natural gas eventually gets consumed. It’s a separate issue that we simply shouldn’t be burning any of that stuff.
There is no clean, cheap, efficient source of hydrogen. You still need to transport it around burning more fuel to transport it all around.
There are already multiple ways to get clean electricity for BEVs and the supply chain is cleaner… Plant, grid, car.
Also coal is already a TINY TINY % of US power production, https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/us-energy-facts/ , going to natural gas sourced hydrogen would be a step backward.
When source to consumption is considered BEV is the cleanest option so far.
Hydrogen is definitely interesting for the future but is currently used by the oil industry to stall the transition away from gas. On top of that, almost all hydrogen making its way to market is dirty.
We can think about hydrogen and the mountains of infrastructure it needs after the oil barons are all dead.
Hardly, since Methanol does most things better.
I don’t think transitioning to either predominantly BEVs or hydrogen powered vehicles really affects the energy mix since the electricity to charge BEVs also comes from natural gas. That said, the infrastructure to support fast charging for a predominantly BEV fleet isn’t there either, especially for cargo trucks.
Most of the hydrogen on market is made with methane.
EVs use whatever source is being given, and most of these sources are converting to renewables.
Not comparable imo.
It’s also worth noting that EVs can be charged at home. Fast charging isn’t necessary for most and it’s silly to pretend like hydrogen doesn’t need its own distribution network. It’s a lot more complicated to set up a hydrogen refilling station than a fast charging one and you can’t fully fill your hydrogen over night by plugging it into your wall outlet.
As I explained in this reply, you can’t count on the grid’s energy mix improving or not getting worse as the vehicle fleet transitions to BEV. What you identify as a problem with FCEVs is really just bad energy policy that BEVs don’t solve either.
I actually kind of agree with you that the ideal BEV requires barely any new infrastructure. It should have a small battery that can support a daily commute and errands with slow charging at home overnight or during the day at work. Yet somehow these “fast” charging stations, which aren’t as fast or convenient as regular gas stations (and still run at least partially on fossil fuels anyway), have to get built everywhere. If we can’t get rid of these stations then let them be hydrogen stations.
That is a possibility but they have already corrupted hydrogen. Between the two, I will go with the one that can go either way. There’s also the fact that EVs are being produced now while hydrogen car production is still a way off, so it’s a stall tactic as well
They can also be set up anywhere and are much more convenient, I’ve seen quite a few in residential streets, companies can set them up in their parking lots, etc. You can’t treat a compressed gas the same way, even if it’s just the canisters. It willl require much more investment in our infrastructure and conversion isn’t straight forward.
I think it’s cool tech but in our situation and looking at our current needs, pushing for hydrogen right now is a pipe dream fueld by the oil industry.
This is mostly for the car industry though, the same doesn’t necessarily hold for the industrial sector.
No need. Tesla is history. All the big carmakers can offer better electric models, either now or very soon.
Unfortunately, I think the other manufacturers are also following Tesla’s model of oversized batteries and software gimmicks.