89
submitted 9 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/evs@lemmy.world

Akio Toyoda, Toyota Motor’s chairman, has never been a huge fan of battery electric vehicles. Last October, as global sales of EVs started to slow down amid macroeconomic uncertainty, Toyoda crowed that people are “finally seeing reality” on EVs. Now, the auto executive is doubling down on his bearish forecast, boldly predicting that just three in 10 cars on the road will be powered by a battery.

“The enemy is CO2,” Toyoda said, proposing a “multi-pathway approach” that doesn’t rely on any one type of vehicle. “Customers, not regulations or politics” should make the decision on what path to rely on, he said.

The auto executive estimated that around a billion people still live in areas without electricity, which limits the appeal of a battery electric vehicle. Toyoda estimated that fully electric cars will only capture 30% of the market, with the remainder taken up by hybrids or vehicles that use hydrogen technology.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Hypx@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Critics of hydrogen cars are repeating the same criticisms of EVs just before they took off. Same can be said of wind power or solar power. In reality, it's just the same anti-green and anti-progress BS you hear about any new green technology. It's all the same story.

[-] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Take it easy, it's a bit more complex than that. Slow as it might be, everyone understands you can charge an EV even with just a regular 15A 120V plug. Stuck at your father in laws out in the country? They've still got a plug.

Generally, people are uncomfortable with high pressure explosive gases. I think overall, hydrogen gas a better shot in industrial/heavy trucking markets than consumer transport.

[-] Hypx@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago

No it isn’t. In fact, the opposite is true. It’s much harder to wire up millions of charging stations with the necessary amount of power, than to deal with high pressure gas. We’ve just normalized the danger of high-voltage electricity. In reality, this is just as safe if not more so, and a lot easier to pull off.

[-] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Erm, no buddy. Everyone's entitled to their incorrect opinion, and this one's a doozy.

How much big of a tank of H2 do you need to effectively equal the energy capacity of a lithium ion pack? If the tank needs to be reasonably sized, how high is the pressure? How do you ensure hydrogen embrittlement isn't a problem on both the tanks and the transport pipes/storage tanks? How does pressure correlate with exfiltration?

Flying wires is a walk in the park, especially competitively.

[-] Hypx@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago

A 700 bar tank will store more than energy than a similarly sized li-ion battery.

As an energy storage system for cars, the problem is already solved. People are just repeating the same anti-progress rhetoric that was used against battery cars.

[-] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

700 bar?? 10000 pounds/in^2??

No, you've unfortunately lost your grip.

[-] Hypx@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago

We've been doing it for over a decade now. It is shown to be safe.

[-] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

No thanks. I'd much prefer electrified mass transit. I'm saying this as a former manufacturing engineer, there's quite a bit that can go wrong with cyclically pressurized vessels in subtle ways that are difficult to non-destructively evaluate.

This is not the path forward for anyone but heavy industry.

[-] Hypx@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago

Then you are just being old and outdated. It is totally safe.

[-] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

I understand your point, and disagree. Are you qualified to really understand this issue, or an opinionated enthusiast?

[-] FlowVoid@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

You can plug an EV into an outlet in your garage. No way could hydrogen be easier than that.

[-] Hypx@kbin.social 3 points 9 months ago

You have to have a garage to begin with. People have created a distorted grasp of what infrastructure even is.

[-] FlowVoid@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Two thirds of Americans have a garage. Roughly zero can refuel hydrogen cells at home.

[-] Hypx@kbin.social 0 points 9 months ago

2/3 is still not 100%. And you can refuel at home if you really wanted. In fact, you can even refuel a gasoline car at home. But in reality this was never a major selling point. It's just the crutch BEV fans are relying on. The refueling infrastructure is the only thing that really matters.

[-] FlowVoid@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Most EV users charge at home, this is absolutely a major selling point, and they would all lose this ability if they switched to hydrogen. Which is why they aren't switching to hydrogen.

[-] Hypx@kbin.social 0 points 9 months ago

And a lot of people can't charge at home. You will still need public stations.

In the end, this is just the whining of a handful of rich people. If it is more straightforward to get everyone to refuel at public stations, it is the better solution.

[-] FlowVoid@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

You will need public stations with hydrogen, too. But with BEV, you need a lot fewer stations. Which is why switching to BEVs is a lot more straightforward.

[-] Hypx@kbin.social -1 points 9 months ago

You will need millions of charging stations everywhere. Both AC and DC charging stations. It is actually less straightforward once you go beyond home recharging.

[-] FlowVoid@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

That's ridiculous, there aren't anywhere near a million gas stations in the US, and you will need a lot fewer charging stations than gas stations.

[-] Hypx@kbin.social -1 points 9 months ago

That's the point: If you can refuel instead of recharge, you don't need that many stations. The number of hydrogen stations would be the same as the number of gas stations. And you have it backwards: You need vastly more charging stations than refueling stations. The US has something like 150k stations, and it's not even close to being enough.

[-] FlowVoid@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago

EV users charge at home. That means they make far fewer trips to charging stations than do hydrogen or gasoline users. In fact, many EV users never go to a charging station and only charge at home. Which means you need far fewer charging stations than refuelling stations.

[-] Hypx@kbin.social -1 points 9 months ago

Again, not everyone can do this. You will have to have public chargers. Plus fast charging for long distance driving. This will still require millions of charging stations, far more than any technology that allows you to refuel.

[-] FlowVoid@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago

If there is less demand for charging stations than refuelling stations, then it is impossible that you will need more charging stations than refuelling stations.

[-] Hypx@kbin.social -1 points 9 months ago

One refueling station can serve thousands of customers, but a charging station needs multiple hours to charge each car. So you need far fewer gas stations. This is why the economics of gas stations worked out in the first place. Before, people bought tanks of gasoline and refueled at home. The gas station model was cheaper.

[-] FlowVoid@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

It takes 20 minutes to charge at a Tesla Supercharger. And their economics are working great, in fact Supercharger stations are more profitable than gas stations.

[-] Hypx@kbin.social -1 points 9 months ago

You mean from 20% to 80% charge? Which is realistically only 150 miles of gained range, and that's assuming everything is working at full power. The alternative gives you 0-100% in 5 minutes consistently. And best of all, it can be scaled up to trucks and above without suddenly realizing you need megawatts of power per station.

In reality, the charging solution is much harder. We've just normalized the idea of using electricity to charge things when it is actually a bigger challenge than dealing with fuels.

"Hydrogen will never work, there are no hydrogen gas stations in my city"

Lordy.

[-] hark@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Meanwhile EVs have taken up a significant share of the market while hydrogen is still niche.

[-] Hypx@kbin.social 2 points 9 months ago

BEVs were a niche for about 100 years.

[-] hark@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

BEVs were around early on, but petrol vehicles overtook them. Battery technology is finally practical for automobiles and it's mainly a matter of increasing energy density/range. Hydrogen, on the other hand, has a lot more obstacles to clear if it wants to get anywhere near the adoption level of even current BEVs.

Also, last I checked, hydrogen vehicles end up using a battery anyway which is charged by the hydrogen, then the battery is what powers the motor. You might as well just use a petrol plug-in hybrid, especially since more energy-dense batteries will mean more and more trips can be covered by the battery alone. In fact, that's my situation right now. I have a plug-in hybrid petrol vehicle and it covers the vast majority of my trips on battery alone.

[-] Hypx@kbin.social 0 points 9 months ago

The only reason why we see BEVs today is the obsession to be green. If that wasn't there, BEVs would still be dead. It has not come close to solving the fundamental limitations of batteries. One of which is that you need a huge charge infrastructure, something that will be more expensive than its backers think.

Hydrogen cars do not necessary need a battery, and only use it for regen power. This is the equivalent of a hybrid car. A hydrogen car is also 100% zero emissions unlike a petrol car. The main point is that a hydrogen car fully replicates the experience of an ICE car. For millions of people, that is an absolute necessity.

[-] hark@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

BEVs have their advantages beyond being green. I wake up with a full "tank" every morning, I can use the heater or air conditioner without emitting carbon monoxide so I can do this in my enclosed garage, the electricity is cheaper than gasoline (plus I can get free charging at work), and if you have a BEV then the vehicle is a lot simpler to implement which means more companies can make vehicles since the barrier to entry is lower and thus increased competition should drive down prices (look out for China, provided governments don't make tariffs too high).

[-] Hypx@kbin.social -1 points 9 months ago

Not everyone can recharge at home. Hydrogen have all of the same advantages except recharging at home (and even this is a "kinda", because home refueling is possible, and plug-in cars exist).

The problem is that we are hitting the limits of the BEV, and no amount of handwaving is going to make the problems go away. This mirrors the push for ethanol powered cars, and sudden realization that we cannot grow enough corn to make it happen. And fantasies about how China or whatever solving the problems is just a repeat of cellulosic ethanol, which was suppose to magically solve the problems of ethanol production.

[-] hark@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

Storage and transportation of hydrogen continue to be the limiting factor for hydrogen and those hurdles don't seem like they can be cleared easily. Only Toyota has really given it much of a try and the hydrogen stations are available in very limited areas. Plus with how complicated the stations are and the problems they can encounter, I've heard they go out of order pretty frequently. Plus the number of vehicles that can fuel at the same time is limited. Given how the hydrogen has to be pressurized or liquefied or whatever, I'm struggling to understand how a home setup would work.

The cool thing about batteries is that there are all sorts of materials to choose from. For example, sodium-ion batteries are hitting the scene now. There are trade-offs, but options are there. Yes, not everyone can recharge at home, but it's a lot easier to set up a charging station than a hydrogen fuel station (or a gas station, for that matter). I think the best option at this point is a plug-in hybrid petrol vehicle, though the downside is the complexity of the drivetrain.

[-] Hypx@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago

Those are wildly exaggerated. The main limitation is that society hasn't invested enough in hydrogen infrastructure. At least not yet. The problems would quickly go away if we did.

You also forget that we've poured many billions of dollars into electrification and battery production. That amount of investment would have solved a lot of those limitations.

As green hydrogen is made from water, there is basically no battery chemistry that can rival it in terms of availability. It is basically the best energy storage mechanism of this type already. Saying that batteries can get better is just misdirection. Also, you can have plug-in hydrogen cars too. The natural path is probably hybrids -> PHEVs -> plug-in FCEVs. Pure BEVs are in many ways a side-trip.

There's not really a ready supply of green hydrogen though?

this post was submitted on 28 Jan 2024
89 points (94.1% liked)

Electric Vehicles

3229 readers
142 users here now

A community for the sharing of links, news, and discussion related to Electric Vehicles.

Rules

  1. No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, casteism, speciesism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
  2. Be respectful, especially when disagreeing. Everyone should feel welcome here.
  3. No self-promotion
  4. No irrelevant content. All posts must be relevant and related to plug-in electric vehicles — BEVs or PHEVs.
  5. No trolling
  6. Policy, not politics. Submissions and comments about effective policymaking are allowed and encouraged in the community, however conversations and submissions about parties, politicians, and those devolving into general tribalism will be removed.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS