It is another way of converting chemical energy into electricity. Basically, another way of building an EV. And since you don't need nearly as big of a battery to power an EV, it is a sensible way of reducing cost, weight, etc. while still achieving zero emissions. There are absolutely situations where those upsides significant outweigh the downsides.
If people were honestly in favor of EVs or zero emissions in general, they would definitely look at fuel cells seriously. But unfortunately, they don't, because they are mostly Tesla fanboys who want Tesla (and only Tesla) to succeed. So they demonize it, alongside everything else including PHEVs and hybrids. Which is why you see posts from "EV fans" that hate most types of EVs.
The Tokyo Metropolitan Government is doubling its budget for hydrogen-related initiatives from fiscal 2024, seeing them as key to combating climate change. While previously supporting fuel cell vehicle (FCV) purchases and the establishment of hydrogen fueling stations, the focus is shifting to promote the adoption of hydrogen...
Again, straight-up BS. People are blatantly lying to you about this subject. BEV companies are spreading nothing but propaganda. It is a factually false claim.
In fact, it can easily be demonstrated to be the case. You generate 9.3kg of CO2 per kg of hydrogen when made from 100% natural gas. At 70 miles per kg, that is 133 grams per mile.
Meanwhile, electricity from natural gas generated 0.86 pounds, or 0.44 kg, per kWh. At 3.4 miles per kWh, that is 129 grams per mile.
You are projecting. You are the one spamming BEV propaganda. You are the one repeating lies. People like you are nothing more than climate change deniers and allies of corporate interests.
Hydrogen pipelines are a lot cheaper and simpler to build than high-voltage powerlines.
And you are just ignoring what I just wrote and substitute outright lies from BEV companies. Again, there is no difference in CO2 emissions when both are made from fossil fuels. As a result, BEVs are not any greener and arguably much worse when you look at certain factors related to weight and battery production. The entire argument over efficiency is just a extremely rare scenario which doesn't even apply in this case, and won't apply even in the future. In reality, you will need to store electricity in a 100% renewable grid. That requires large scale and long-duration energy storage solutions. One of which is hydrogen based energy storage. So you will charge your BEV with hydrogen power in the future. This quickly kills the idea that BEVs are anymore efficient.
And that is before you factor future innovation. In the long run, we will make hydrogen directly, such as from photocatalysts or thermal processes that don't use electricity. Fuel cells will increase in efficiency until they are basically the same as conventional batteries. As a result, this entire argument will be totally rejected. It will only be remembered as this BEV propaganda statement from the early 21st century.
The brand-new platinum-catalysed hydrogen fuel cell system that has just been released for passenger cars reveals that fuel cells can be as cheap to manufacture as internal combustion engines (ICEs), UK company Intelligent Energy has highlighted in a release to Mining Weekly. The company’s patented system has been designed to...
You only need grams of it per fuel cell stack. It is not much more than what is already being used in catalytic converters. So it is unlikely to be a big problem.
Almost no evidence is not "no evidence." That's pretty much where the mythicism position falls apart, because they have to resort to dismissing what evidence we have to make their position valid. The other point is that if we use the level of standards demanded by mythicists, virtually all people from history can no longer be verified as real. It effectively deletes most of history.
We have about as good enough reason to believe that he existed as any other historical person. That is my point the whole time. And it is the point of all historical scholars on this topic.
If that isn’t enough evidence, and we instead insist on a standard of proof that puts historical Jesus in the unconfirmed category, then we have to abandon nearly all historical people from the list of confirmed. History before the modern era almost completely vanishes in that case.
Historical scholars are not religious authorities. It is more or less a field of scientific study. All claims are built on the basis of evidence and logical inferences from the evidence.
I will merely add that your position is not new and in fact it is many decades old. In that timeframe, it has made zero progress at convincing the historical community. And a major stumbling point appears to be the total lack of an alternative explanation and evidence for it.
Of course, anything can be wrong. But it cannot be the basis of any argument. For one thing, this can easily be applied to your position. You could be wrong too.
The people who they're basing their knowledge on for sure had an opinion on it, whether they do or not. We have little to no first hand records. Almost everything is recorded by someone who cared. To ignore this would be a huge issue with the legitimacy of the argument.
Historical scholars will be the first to tell you that this is the problem with all of history. There are almost never first-hand records of any event before the modern era. Their job is to piece together a sequence of events that is most likely based on what evidence they do have. If this isn't sufficient for you, then problem then becomes that nearly all of history before the modern era can no longer be verified.
Mythicism is basically a dead position. Nobody in academia supports it, outside of a few diehards who have basically lost all credibility years ago. The problem is that it is simply bad historical scholarship. If it were taken seriously, it would mean that nearly nobody in history can be convincingly proven to exist.
Stadler Rail’s hydrogen powered multiple-unit passenger trainset has set a record by traveling more than 1,700 miles without refueling or recharging....
It is vanishingly unlikely given what we know about the subject. Even the possibility of running into multiple right-wing black people at once in normal circumstances, given that they're around 5-10% of the black population, is very unlikely. Combined with an industry where they're rare to begin with, even more so. As a result, it is exceedingly unlikely that this story is real. But again, not impossible.
Then you think like Elon Musk, who thinks we should have "both sides" of the issue, even when the other side is just extremism or foreign actors. We know from history that this doesn't work. The community will inevitably end up being simply not worth it, and nearly everyone leaves.
It is a Ponzi scheme from a financial sense. In the end, it's just a launch provider. It's not suddenly going to become the next Apple in terms of market value. But it is valued like that, and they were able to raise billions of dollars by lying about its potential business ventures.
When scrolling Lemmy (compared to reddit in the past), all I see is doom and gloom / news. I don’t see interesting conversations or comments to read....
"I think what you're reacting to is that, at the moment, Biden is an unpopular president seeking a second term while Trump is a popular figure inside his party who is winning primary races. I wouldn't necessarily compare the two."...
I haven't read anything from the NYT that would constitute "actual journalism" in what seems like many years now. It's not much different than the NY Post, just with less bombast.
Your rhetoric is decades out of date. We can easily store hydrogen in vast quantity at very low cost. If anything, you are spread an old oil & gas talking point. According to them, nothing except fossil fuels is storable.
Biden quadruples tariffs on Chinese electric cars (www.bbc.com)
Nearly all major car companies are sabotaging EV transition, and Japan is worst, study finds (thedriven.io)
deleted_by_author
deleted_by_author
Tokyo bets big on hydrogen with moves to boost commercial fuel cell vehicles - The Mainichi (mainichi.jp)
The Tokyo Metropolitan Government is doubling its budget for hydrogen-related initiatives from fiscal 2024, seeing them as key to combating climate change. While previously supporting fuel cell vehicle (FCV) purchases and the establishment of hydrogen fueling stations, the focus is shifting to promote the adoption of hydrogen...
New platinum-based hydrogen fuel cell as cheap to make as conventional car engine (www.miningweekly.com)
The brand-new platinum-catalysed hydrogen fuel cell system that has just been released for passenger cars reveals that fuel cells can be as cheap to manufacture as internal combustion engines (ICEs), UK company Intelligent Energy has highlighted in a release to Mining Weekly. The company’s patented system has been designed to...
There’s a ton of evidence (midwest.social)
Findings cast doubt on the existence of Jesus Christ (www.alternet.org)
cross-posted from: midwest.social/post/10506910
Two thirds of CD Projekt developers are now working on The Witcher 4, reaching its target staff size (www.videogameschronicle.com)
Stadler hydrogen trainset sets distance record (www.trains.com)
Stadler Rail’s hydrogen powered multiple-unit passenger trainset has set a record by traveling more than 1,700 miles without refueling or recharging....
Green Hydrogen Will Become The 21st Century Version Of Oil (www.forbes.com)
Countries and companies are now preparing and forming international coalitions to position themselves for the green hydrogen future.
Black Voters May Be Abandoning the Dems—But They'll Never Be Republicans (www.newsweek.com)
Leaked SpaceX documents show company forbids employees to sell stock if it deems they've misbehaved (techcrunch.com)
Is anyone else tired of the doom posts on Lemmy?
When scrolling Lemmy (compared to reddit in the past), all I see is doom and gloom / news. I don’t see interesting conversations or comments to read....
A New York Times reporter was asked why they consistently frame things as bad for Biden but never bad for Trump. (old.reddit.com)
"I think what you're reacting to is that, at the moment, Biden is an unpopular president seeking a second term while Trump is a popular figure inside his party who is winning primary races. I wouldn't necessarily compare the two."...
Oil industry has sought to block state backing for green tech since 1960s (www.theguardian.com)