GM had record sales figures, just before they filed for bankruptcy. The problem with the car industry is that if you're willing to sell at a loss, any level of sales can be achieved. But that is not a viable business. In reality, too many car companies are selling BEVs at a loss. This will have consequences soon.
Hypx
joined 1 year ago
7
New platinum-based hydrogen fuel cell as cheap to make as conventional car engine
(www.miningweekly.com)
Again, you are the one brainwashed by corporate propaganda, mainly from Tesla. An FCEV is an EV. That is undeniable fact. As a result, it is equally as valid of a solution as BEVs are. The rest of your posts are you being totally confused by this fact.
Losses from pipelines aren't very large either. At long distances, this is actually less than what you will experience from wires.
Like I said, the entire process of making and using hydrogen is analogous to battery swapping. You have to think of the battery as being this fluid that can be moved around to where it needs to go, effectively replacing wires. But the end result is basically the same.
You cannot charge a battery and come out equal either. But losses can be minimized in both cases. Transportation via pipelines is also analogous to transporting electricity via wires. Both have losses, but it can be minimized.
Like I said, the idea is basically the same as battery swapping, except the battery in question is a chemical fluid that can be move around like it was electricity.
Because, again, you need to store that energy in banks of giant batteries. Something that is very expensive. And again, if you realize that FCEVs are basically doing to same thing, just using water instead of giant batteries, it is going to much cheaper while not actually reducing efficiency that much.
In the long-run, there won't be hardly ANY difference in efficiency, because again, both are electrochemical systems that work the same way. This is the basic fact that you are failing to grasp.
Finally, hydrogen is pretty unavoidable for a green society anyways. You need it for long-duration energy storage anyways, and so will industry and heavy transportation. Meaning that even an all-BEV society will still need vast amounts of green hydrogen if it really wants to break dependency on fossil fuels.
If anything, you are handwaving the problems of BEVs. Hydrogen is the solution to that ironically.
Because it's all electrochemistry? Have you even looked a fuel cell diagram? It is basically anodes and cathodes turning chemical energy into electricity. Just like a battery.
In fact, it arguably IS a battery. Hence why FCEVs are also EVs.
Green hydrogen is made by electrolysis of water using wind and solar energy. There is no carbon involved. As green energy scales up, the cost of this will drop to extremely low levels. Margin cost is basically zero, as you only need water.
As a result, it is a far simpler and scalable solution than going with batteries. You avoid all of the mining and infrastructure of batteries. And because it is so much more scalable, you end up having to use hydrogen for energy storage anyways. Even BEVs will have to depend on hydrogen power for long-duration energy storage needs.
The problem is, again, you are fully brainwashed. You are repeating nothing but BEV propaganda from companies like Tesla. And the ironic thing is that this all originated from oil & gas companies. It is climate change denial rhetoric only you don't know it.
And what is a battery, but an electrochemical system that converts chemical energy into electrical energy? A fuel cell works the same way.
The problem is that you have been fully brainwashed. Everything I said is true, and everything you said is false. You need to step back and realize who is lying to you.
Again, wrong. More gibberish. Green hydrogen can power any aspect of transportation. You do not need to have to involve carbon. Pipelines exist too. You can replace copper wires with pipelines, and it would be cheaper to move energy this way.
Again, the problem is that you need giant banks of batteries to power your all-BEV fantasy. That is much more expensive and in fact implies an unbreakable dependence on fossil fuels to build those things. Something avoided with hydrogen.
In fact, you have fully inverted reality. Hydrogen, not batteries, are mandatory in a renewable energy powered society. You will have to accept this simply fact.
Finally, you have to let go of BEV propaganda. It is all lies copied over from the oil & gas industry. It is all lies with zero basis in fact.
Again, all of this is pure gibberish. Both fuel cells and batteries are electrochemical systems. Both have the same level of efficiency in the theoretical sense.
Like I said, you are repeating bullshit from BEV companies like Tesla. All of the anti-hydrogen stuff is just corporate propaganda and has zero basis in fact.
And what's ironic is that it is copied from propaganda that originated from the oil industry. BEV companies repeating this stuff just means they are repeating the same anti-green rhetoric used against all green energy. Wind, solar, geothermal, etc., even BEVs themselves, when through the same crap. And you are doing the same just against fuel cells and hydrogen.
More gibberish. All of the steps needed for an hydrogen infrastructure can be powered by hydrogen. Even steel made for the purpose can be made via hydrogen reduction. So can any trucks or equipment needed. Meanwhile, all of the steps for building batteries or wires requirement fossil fuels at some point. After all, who is going to mine all of that stuff? Same with refining it to pure metals. You are unaware of how dependent BEVs are to fossil fuels. Something that won't be solved unless we adopt hydrogen on a vast scale.
And BTW, steel is a lot cheaper than copper. So pipelines are much cheaper than wires. In reality, you are just brainwashed by BEV propaganda mostly coming from Tesla. You'd save money by going with hydrogen. BEVs are the more expensive option.
You're clearly stuck in the past. Green hydrogen production is rapidly expanding. It is the new solar or wind boom.