Why did we abandon hydrogen cars so quickly?

[claes]

@claes
well ignoring things wont help, cars are here to stay for now, and infrastructure etc, is part of it, if we like it or not..

Or just have governments invest in mass transit rather than developing infrastructure projects based on unproven and proprietary technologies that don’t discourage car ownership?

All of this car tech is awesome but if the concern is emissions and its effect on the world then the solution is a lot easier than the current market allows. Which is why I think the infrastructure question gets off-topic — building wireless charging into roads is neat but it’s way cheaper and far less resource intensive for both private and public investment to build public infrastructure.

 

[Waldorf]

@claes
public transport (almost all "train" based stuff), isnt always more efficient/less emissions "per person",
vs car, unless its relatively new/fuel source is "green". sometimes even so bad, flying is better..

 

[claes]

Not only is that an unusual circumstance (honestly haven’t heard of a public transit system that’s less efficient than if there wasn’t one, I’m wondering if you’re being hyperbolic), but what is the point of a broad infrastructure project to reduce emissions other than to reduce emissions (ie of course it’d be green)?

 

[Waldorf]

ppl forget a bus/train uses recourses/has emissions, no matter if its empty or full.
the power for tram/subway isnt coming from green sources (most is still coal/trash burning),

start to look at per person using (not seats available), and its not so much of a big difference vs car, especially when looking at +60mpg cars.

the same with any recent V8 car/pickup costing less resources/emitting less (overall) pollution vs a Prius, from plant till junk yard.
just because something is green when being used, doesnt mean its green overall...

 

[claes]

the power for tram/subway isnt coming from green sources (most is still coal/trash burning),

I see that that’s the case in Spain, but most major transit systems are electric these days.

And, again, we’re not talking about existing systems, we’re talking about uprooting streets to either install wireless charging or transit.

start to look at per person using (not seats available), and its not so much of a big difference vs car,

According to the US department of transportation both buses and trains only need 20% capacity to be more energy efficient than cars per passenger. Subway systems produce 76% less greenhouse gas emissions than cars, and bus transit systems produce 33% less.

https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/PublicTransportationsRoleInRespondingToClimateChange2010.pdf

According to the International Energy Agency, cars emit between 57 and 322 gCO2-eq/pkm (grams of carbon dioxide-equivalent per passenger-kilometer), compared to buses at just 22-92 gCO2-eq/pkmand trains at 6-118 gCO2-eq/pkm.

GHG intensity of passenger transport modes, 2019 – Charts – Data & Statistics - IEA

GHG intensity of passenger transport modes, 2019 - Chart and data by the International Energy Agency.

www.iea.org

Perhaps you have other data though? I really can’t imagine an airplane being more efficient than a bus/train unless the latter are completely empty, which is what I meant by hyperbole. If you build a train system in the Arctic or northern Canada it’s probably going to be inefficient, but why would you?

especially when looking at +60mpg cars.

the same with any recent V8 car/pickup costing less resources/emitting less (overall) pollution vs a Prius, from plant till junk yard.

I am unconvinced that changing the majority of vehicles in urban areas to high efficiency vehicles would use/emit less resources than public transit, especially from plant to junkyard, while high efficiency vehicles rely so much on rare minerals, but if you have any data to support these claims I’m all ears!

 

[AusWolf]

Or just have governments invest in mass transit rather than developing infrastructure projects based on unproven and proprietary technologies that don’t discourage car ownership?

All of this car tech is awesome but if the concern is emissions and its effect on the world then the solution is a lot easier than the current market allows. Which is why I think the infrastructure question gets off-topic — building wireless charging into roads is neat but it’s way cheaper and far less resource intensive for both private and public investment to build public infrastructure.

Or a rather unorthodox idea: make driving tests stricter, and invest into better public transport services. If whole countries in the East don't find any trouble with getting to work by bus, then I don't know why we should.

Edit: I read a bit further, I see you had a similar idea in mind.

ppl forget a bus/train uses recourses/has emissions, no matter if its empty or full.
the power for tram/subway isnt coming from green sources (most is still coal/trash burning),

start to look at per person using (not seats available), and its not so much of a big difference vs car, especially when looking at +60mpg cars.

the same with any recent V8 car/pickup costing less resources/emitting less (overall) pollution vs a Prius, from plant till junk yard.
just because something is green when being used, doesnt mean its green overall...

Except that you spend way less time in traffic if everybody uses the bus. Even electric vehicles use power for heating, infotainment, etc while stood still. It's wasted energy. If 20 people use the bus, that's potentially 20 less cars waiting for a green light (most people drive to work alone these days).

 

[Fangio1951]

ok - I'll throw the cat amongst the pigeons now.

We have gone = steam -> petrol -> electric -> hydrogen -> nuclear (once it rolls of the assembly line, it never has to be filled/charged ever again)

?????????/

 

[AusWolf]

ok - I'll throw the cat amongst the pigeons now.

We have gone = steam -> petrol -> electric -> hydrogen -> nuclear (once it rolls of the assembly line, it never has to be filled/charged ever again)

?????????/

Never to be filled again? So that no company makes money on you once you've bought the car? As long as we have capitalism, that'll never happen.

 

[the54thvoid]

ok - I'll throw the cat amongst the pigeons now.

We have gone = steam -> petrol -> electric -> hydrogen -> nuclear (once it rolls of the assembly line, it never has to be filled/charged ever again)

?????????/

Steam isn't an energy source.

In power plants, coal/oil/gas (inc. hydrogen), and even nuclear plants, all heat water to produce steam which drives turbines which create electricity.

Combustion replaces steam in fossil fuel powered cars.

Also - the electric 'engine' for cars came before the petrol engine. First EV was built in the 1830's, though it was a one-off. More were made before the petrol engine was invented, and once Benz patented his gas powered engine, there were EV and gas cars. Henry Ford sent petril/gas cars into the mainstream by creating a factory method to mass-produce a 'cheap' commercial vehicle (the model T).

 

[AusWolf]

Steam isn't an energy source.

In power plants, coal/oil/gas (inc. hydrogen), and even nuclear plants, all heat water to produce steam which drives turbines which create electricity.

Combustion replaces steam in fossil fuel powered cars.

Also - the electric 'engine' for cars came before the petrol engine. First EV was built in the 1830's, though it was a one-off. More were made before the petrol engine was invented, and once Benz patented his gas powered engine, there were EV and gas cars. Henry Ford sent petril/gas cars into the mainstream by creating a factory method to mass-produce a 'cheap' commercial vehicle (the model T).

If we think that deep, electric cars aren't electric, either. Sure, the motor is powered by electricity, but that electricity is produced by nuclear/renewable/coal power plants. An EV is only as green as the electricity that powers it (and the car's manufacturing and recycling technology) is.

 

[the54thvoid]

My point was simply to correct the flow of pigeons that had steam included with sources of fuel, and to say that EV came first.

Not sure why you felt the need to counter?

 

[AusWolf]

My point was simply to correct the flow of pigeons that had steam included with sources of fuel, and to say that EV came first.

Not sure why you felt the need to counter?

I didn't mean to counter - just to add. Your comment started a train of thought in my head, that's all.

 

[Waldorf]

(im located in spain, but thats the only "connection", past experience is N.A. and (mainland) Europe.)

Ppl make the mistake to think emissions on public transport are per user, but are ususally counted per seat,
and especially on the east coast US (besides maybe inner city NY), most stuff is empty (les than 10 ppl),
nor does it mean they produce the least amount of emissions, big difference between a ev/hybrid bus from last year,
vs some +10y old diesel without particle filter.

in short, its the same ppl saying that a prius is "greener" that think public transport is (always) more efficient,
and even electric powered stuff isnt greener, if the power is made with coal/nuclear means.

and sure, most the time it might not be "more" efficient to fly/drive, but at least close enough (e.g. +90 mpg diesel),
that im not trying to do everything with tram/bus etc, short of goin to/from work.

 

[Space Lynx]

I wonder if in like two hundred years other humans will look back on us and be like how were they so dumb, all they had to do was use these giant magnets in a push pull setup to move the pistons... haha jk I have no idea.

Back on topic though, I would like to remind everyone that I think the greatest thing would be for hydrogen to power the big heavy stuff, like semi-trucks, since all semi-trucks typically only stop at specific sites on their path, it would be a much easier rollout and easier to manage distribution system of hydrogen tank stations to fill up. Then regular gas cars in the northern states (because you still need plastics from left over oil byproduct anyway and EV doesn't do well in the northern cold), solar paneled EV in places like Nevada/Arizona... the Aptera car comes to mind if I lived in that area, and if toyota comes through with solid state tech - then that would be for everyone else. Also diversifying the countries energy like this is probably a great benefit to national security.

I think the real shame is the solar roof stuff, we should have had solar roofs on every house/business in the super sunny states ages ago, would have cost a fraction of the wars that changed nothing. Truly a waste of a civilization, we had a chance for easy mode and squandered it to fulfill the ego that blinds us all.

 

[Shrek]

I think the real shame is the solar roof stuff, we should have had solar roofs on every house/business in the super sunny states ages ago, would have cost a fraction of the wars that changed nothing. Truly a waste of a civilization, we had a chance for easy mode and squandered it to fulfill the ego that blinds us all.

Probably more efficient for power companies to run solar fields, where solar panels that track the Sun makes sense.

 

[Space Lynx]

Probably more efficient for power companies to run solar fields, where solar panels that track the Sun makes sense.

yeah but the power companies then have control over the energy costs... if the individual takes solar on to their roof like this guy did, then they pay $0 a month electricity bill - freedom is the idea here, EV charged weekly, AC on, and owe the energy company $0... and this guy lives in New Jersey and still pulled this off thanks to energy credits he generated.

if this was affordable for everyone the world would be a much better place.

 

[dragontamer5788]

yeah but the power companies then have control over the energy costs... if the individual takes solar on to their roof like this guy did, then they pay $0 a month electricity bill - freedom is the idea here, EV charged weekly, AC on, and owe the energy company $0... and this guy lives in New Jersey and still pulled this off thanks to energy credits he generated.

if this was affordable for everyone the world would be a much better place.

SolarCity's solar panels were a scam. Tesla buying Elon's cousin's company was a scam. Everything there was a scam.

Solar Panels are a good idea, but good grief, "solar roofs" never worked. The factory in Buffalo New York was a scam to take money from the government. Etc. etc. The amount of fail that Elon Musk (and his cousin) has over this angers me, and doubly so because Elon Musk literally paid nothing for any of his mistakes... instead Musk found a way to have New York (state) foot the bill and have everyone else pay for all the failures.

Solar Panels will be deployed into the future. But there are now a legion of disbelievers because of the scammers. Elon Musk (and co) has hurt the cause far more than you might expect. And seeing more-and-more dumbass Youtubers who can't see the scam for what it is... shows just how easily Musk tricks people on a widespread scale (or pays them off behind the scenes or something. I dunno).

Musk takes people's money, and then makes those people feel good about getting swindled by stoking their egos with marketing. Its disgusting. A lot of the backlash against "Solar Panels" is legitimate distrust of this crap, because there's obviously bad deals being peddled here.

yeah but the power companies then have control over the energy costs..

You know that SolarCity (now Tesla) owns the panels it installs, right? If you read the contract, none of those people own the damn roofs or solar panels that were installed. Its a disgusting scam. Despite this contract, they still ran out of money and were forced to call upon his billionaire cousin to save the company. And then Elon decides to use other people's money to save Solar City, Elon couldn't even be bothered risking his own money on the whole scheme.

freedom is the idea here

SolarCity never offered freedom. They offered some of the crappiest contracts I've ever seen in my life, and managed to shove it down people's throats and get online marketers (aka: Influencers) into tricking large segments of the population into thinking it was a good idea.

------------------------

Yes, we should push SolarPanels where they make sense. But don't ever sign a contract where the damn company owns the panels after installation with a shitty reverse-loan over the next 20 years.

 

[Shrek]

freedom is the idea here

Even with solar panels one needs the power company at night, so one is not exactly free.

 

[Space Lynx]

Solar Panels are a good idea, but good grief, "solar roofs" never worked.

I encourage you to watch the video I linked above your post... solar roofs work amazingly well, even for cloudy areas like New Jersey where he lives. He explains everything in detail in the video, I highly recommend everyone watch it.

Even with solar panels one needs the power company at night, so one is not exactly free.

Marquee is one of the most famous and trusted youtubers around, and he does not need the power company at night, as he uses Powerwall. Again, I highly recommend everyone watch the video as he explains it all in detail better than anyone else I have seen do.

 

[Count von Schwalbe]

yeah but the power companies then have control over the energy costs... if the individual takes solar on to their roof like this guy did, then they pay $0 a month electricity bill - freedom is the idea here, EV charged weekly, AC on, and owe the energy company $0... and this guy lives in New Jersey and still pulled this off thanks to energy credits he generated.

if this was affordable for everyone the world would be a much better place.

Last true payback analysis I did showed about 90 years payback for a solar panel.

It lasts 15 years at best.

And as demand increases so does price.

 

[Space Lynx]

Last true payback analysis I did showed about 90 years payback for a solar panel.

It lasts 15 years at best.

And as demand increases so does price.

Marquee does the math and shows you step by step the math to prove it, his payback is in ten years - and it will last for 25 years under warranty, if it fails to charge a certain point within that 25 years it gets replaced. Please watch the video.

here it is again so you don't have to scroll up.

 

[Waldorf]

@Count von Schwalbe
half the ppl i know in europe that have solar, have it for 10-20y, so not sure where you get your info,
but real world shows it works for longer.
a good friend in germany has solar producing 30kw, thats the most he was allowed to do,
and even with charging 2 evs, hes making money feeding power to the grid.

and the same way demand increases over time, so does production and tech, in 10y we should see film like panels,
allowing to cover almost any surface incl windows, making solar possible in areas where its not 350 days of sunshine...

 

[dragontamer5788]

I encourage you to watch the video I linked above your post... solar roofs work amazingly well, even for cloudy areas like New Jersey where he lives. He explains everything in detail in the video, I highly recommend everyone watch it.

And I recommend the opposite. I highly recommend that you recognize bullshit marketing from Youtube influencers and ignore such videos. SolarCity was a scam company, and Solar Tiles were the WORST of their offerings. These are well known facts.

SolarCity had a few times to prove themselves. Those times went up in literal flames when Walmart's roofs caught on fire repeatedly, when SolarCity failed to build out the $Billion factory as promised to the state of New York, and when they started scamming out customers with their bullshit contract.

The bullshit contract alone from SolarCity is all you need to know and analyze. When you don't even own your own damn roof anymore there's problems. Anyone willing to sign that contract is a dumbass (or alternatively: have been turned by bullshit marketing like that video). IF anyone goes solar, make sure you own your own damn roof. IE: buy from regular companies who perform regular work, and none of this weird financial bullshit that SolarCity makes you sign.

------

Solar is a good idea. But please, please please don't encourage people towards the crappy contracts or shitty deals that SolarCity (now Tesla) offers. There's plenty of solar installers who will perform good work, and you get to keep your roof / own your own damn solar panels after it all.

Even with solar panels one needs the power company at night, so one is not exactly free.

You don't even own the panels if you buy from SolarCity. Anyone who claims "Freedom" with SolarCity panels is bullshitting you.

If a hailstorm hits and damages your roof (and solar panels), good luck removing those panels. You're not allowed to. You're at the mercy of Tesla's customer service department, even as your roof leaks and mold seeps in. Its by far the worst of the worst of available options. I'm a big Solar fan, but good grief, you gotta stay away from this crap.

 

[Count von Schwalbe]

It was a while ago, and the climate around here is not ideal for solar.

I was just throwing in my $.02.

 

[Space Lynx]

@dragontamer5788 he literally shows you the math and the graphs in the video and even shows you his actual bill from the energy department. your refusal to see logic and reason is beyond my ability to fix, good luck to you.

lot of shitty influencers out there true, this guy is not one of him, he is legit in everything he does, one of the last standup guys on YouTube actually, up there with GamersNexus.