Technology

55767 readers

3026 users here now

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

Our Rules

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

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

435

Shell Is Immediately Closing All Of Its California Hydrogen Stations | The oil giant is one of the big players in hydrogen globally, but even it can't make its operations work here. (insideevs.com)

submitted 4 months ago by L4s to c/technology

307 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Shell Is Immediately Closing All Of Its California Hydrogen Stations | The oil giant is one of the big players in hydrogen globally, but even it can't make its operations work here.::The oil giant is one of the big players in hydrogen globally, but even it can't make its operations work here. All seven of its California stations will close immediately.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] daqqad -2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Most people in the world cannot put solar panels on their roof today. Even if you exclude all the places people don't own cars I still think my statement will be true.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Whether that's true or not, it doesn't invalidate their points

[–] daqqad -3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Yes it does. If you cannot generate electricity at home, all those points are moot.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Only if you're looking at it from a purely all-or-nothing view since those infrastructure points will be improved as adoption progresses... And building that infrastructure is just the endpoints for the most part since the electricity is already being delivered, which you seem to continue to ignore or handwave as having to do with adopting the "wrong" tech (which even with your arguments is only the "wrong" tech because of infrastructure, which is a circular argument)

Right now, plenty of people can adopt this and benefit from it. Over time, as it becomes more ubiquitous, it'll make more financial sense for places where people can't put in their own stations to set those up, possibly backed by solar. Which will be far less infrastructure needed than hydrogen stations, hydrogen production facilities, and hydrogen trucks to haul it to the distribution points (stations).

[–] daqqad 1 points 4 months ago

My argument is it is wrong tech because of current state of development of batteries. Slow charging, low energy capacity, heavy weight, using dangerous chemicals, etc.

I'm one of those people - I have an EV, but I wish I had a hybrid that has a tiny, light battery for ~50 miles of city driving I can charge at home and a proper size hydrogen tank I can use to travel as far as I want.

I stand by my argument that we should have invested heavily in hydrogen cars and infrastructure. Batteries will inevitably make it into cars as their development progresses. They are just not the right tech now.