tturedraider wrote

That’s not what this is. This is using hydrogen to provide a source of energy to do onboard charging for EVs.

I know that. I am talking in the future, ICE may be a further step.

orkinos wrote

I know that. I am talking in the future, ICE may be a further step.

Toyota and BMW have been spending a lot of R&D money for the use of hydrogen in the ICE vehicles for the last two decades. There is no infrastructure in place for a wide use of this technology but EV started the same way and still is not there yet.
But according to EV adapters, electric is the only way to go. I don't care for petrol or EV as I am neither Elon Musk nor an Arab sheikh. I want a convenient, clean and enjoyable way of personal transportation and if one option is proven to be more sustainable and economical than others, I'd go for that.

thebmw wrote

Why not? Objectively and scientificly, this should have been the way to give 2 decades ago. But Elon and his cult latched on to electric, with NO consideration for the environment (it was purely a business and opportunity decision), and shunned hydrogen so he would have no alt energy competition.

Are the logistical hurdles with hydrogen, absolutely, as there continue to be with electric. Will BMW and Toyota succeed, probably not. But should they be commended for trying and actually taking steps that are environmentally friendly, 100%!

At least the fires won’t burn on for hours or days. It will just be one huge explosion. 🤣🤣🤣

Mirai sales started in 2014, note where EV's were at the same time period, note how the race is going a decade later. Any day now hydrogen will take off, only thing holding it back are people to buy them, no wait, people will buy them when they have a place to refuel them, no wait, nobody will build refuel stations until they have customers to use them, no wait, the problem is there aren't any places manufacturing hydrogen so stations can't be built, no wait, the real problem is refueling the car costs a fortune so nobody will buy the cars or build the stations.

Don't worry, BMW and Toyota are starting a joint venture with none of the problems above being worried about by the two of them, they want to "promote" the use.

2014 it was almost impossible to go out of your area with an EV and you couldn't leave Los Angeles with your Mirai, a decade later it isn't convenient to take an EV across the country and you can't leave CA with your Mirai, not even visit most of the state. Hydrogen is nothing more than the same dream it was a decade ago, just getting left further behind every day.

orkinos wrote

I know that. I am talking in the future, ICE may be a further step.

I’m taking this as some confirmation BMW is giving up on hydrogen ICE. They worked on the hydrogen E65/66 7er for years and they weren’t able to figure out how to make it work for mass production.

hufington wrote

You are missing the point and contradicting yourself. With that logic, your example that you gave in your first reply is not great use case as most of the first time use of any technology. It is not if EV stays or not. What may seem to be the way to go can change with progress. Stick with EV or whatever floats your boat.

I don’t have a problem with your opinion can you please elaborate?

orkinos wrote

I love these EV people. Something that just started not too long ago is immediately considered the only and absolute way to go. I am getting my popcorn 🍿 to enjoy this endless debate.

On a side note, hufington did not say current EV is bad, but said just because it started bad doesn't mean that it'll go bad.

I’m not perfect… I must’ve interpreted it incorrectly

It’s tough sometimes when you read things different than the way it was intended

tturedraider wrote

Back to the issue the government and the BEV industry loves to ignore. Over 80% of people in the U.S. live in cities and that number is projected to continue to increase. In major U.S. cities like Chicago only 25% of housing is single family homes. BEVs are not practical. A hydrogen fueled EV could be.

This is what a typical residential street in Chicago looks like. How do you propose BEVs are going to get charged?

There's electricity already flowing to each of those streetlights in your photo. I see a lot more live electricity in your photo than I see gasoline pumps (or hydrogen refueling stations).

orkinos wrote

I love these EV people. Something that just started not too long ago is immediately considered the only and absolute way to go. I am getting my popcorn �� to enjoy this endless debate.

VW and Audi bet the farm on EV over here in Germany and people are going nuts as of late because VAG is now weighing massive layoffs and closing multiple manufacturing plants due to low demand (because the cars are junk).

It is hard to overstate just how huge this is, given how many people it affects and just how tied into the government and economy these horrid companies are.

Volvo also just backed out of making its fleet full electric by 2035.

The whole thing is imploding because EVs are unsafe, poorly made, and were never meant to replace the ICEs--they are a means to get the plebes to "own nothing" in line with the Davos/EU 2030 Agenda.

Go woke, go broke.

Alpine Wait wrote

There's electricity already flowing to each of those streetlights in your photo. I see a lot more live electricity in your photo than I see gasoline pumps (or hydrogen refueling stations).

And how do you propose that electricity gets to the cars? How many charging stations do you propose the city install on each street that have the ability to charge the individual user for the electricity distributed, that will work reliably, that can’t be disconnected by a$$holes walking down the street, that will stand up to constant use in all kinds of weather conditions and be able to withstand the abuse of vandals and not be destroyed? I’m sure there are still a good number of contingencies I didn’t think about.

///M TOWN wrote

I don’t have a problem with your opinion can you please elaborate?

I am not against EV or any other new technology.

I am not convinced yet that the electric propulsion using an enormous amount of batteries is a clean solution as advertised.
It is the same for petrol and hydrogen.
We'll need to see which one is the lesser evil.

When I mentioned the cabs in NY, it was to show that a technology cannot be very sophisticated and efficient in the beginning but it is worth considering and developing. This is also true for hydrogen despite some negative experiences in the beginning.
At the end, economies of scale will dictate what will survive in the long run.

I am all for progress and try out things before judging them blindly. I have a Taycan that we use in the family and although fast and sporty I do not like the driving feeling in comparison to my former ICE Porsches. Also, the inconvenience of finding a charging spot outside and mileage anxiety is not working out for me.

But, it may get better in the future.

///M TOWN wrote

I’m not perfect… I must’ve interpreted it incorrectly

It’s tough sometimes when you read things different than the way it was intended

Give ///M TOWN the benefit of the doubt, stand up character on this forum.

If I may wade into the debate, 1) hydrogen is one of several “sustainable” solutions/alternatives to fossil fuel dependence. 2) Toyota is really leading the effort to build sustainable ICE, and I’m all for that…. 3) as ///M town indicated, EV will not be a solution for everyone. There’s no way that will work for two main reasons: apartment dwellers and home street/garage parking (cities). 4) there’s a “developed world”-centric mentality and we can forget about the developing world’s access to - and dependability on - electricity 5) EV is nice and reduces power/energy/fossil fuel usage by 2/3 to 3/4, but true fossil fuel reduction would be an engine that doesn’t require any non-renewable energy source beyond that which is required to build it and supply it. Like a hydrogen powered engine.

tturedraider wrote

Back to the issue the government and the BEV industry loves to ignore. Over 80% of people in the U.S. live in cities and that number is projected to continue to increase. In major U.S. cities like Chicago only 25% of housing is single family homes. BEVs are not practical. A hydrogen fueled EV could be.

This is what a typical residential street in Chicago looks like. How do you propose BEVs are going to get charged?

See picture below, you don't need a single family home to have a charger. Apartment complex near me is advertising they have them now. Go ahead and explain your plan for building hydrogen stations across the nation and the huge problem of refueling costs far higher than gasoline. Only gets worse when you look at the cost to refuel an EV vs a hydrogen vehicle.

It is currently almost 14 times more expensive to drive a Toyota Mirai in California than a comparable Tesla battery-electric car after a massive hydrogen fuel price hike, according to calculations by Hydrogen Insight.

https://www.hydrogeninsight.com/transport/analysis-it-is-now-almost-14-times-more-expensive-to-drive-a-toyota-hydrogen-car-in-california-than-a-comparable-tesla-ev/2-1-1519315

tturedraider wrote

I’m taking this as some confirmation BMW is giving up on hydrogen ICE. They worked on the hydrogen E65/66 7er for years and they weren’t able to figure out how to make it work for mass production.

We don't know that for sure as the internal combustion is pretty much similar for hydrogen and petrol but the issue may be the infrastructure to supply hydrogen and storing it.
There are many cities in the world that use hydrogen powered city busses as zero emission clean transportation option. But it is easier to store the fuel on a bus and fill it up at a huge garage facility than personal vehicles and privately owned gas stations.

Bimmerfun82 wrote

Give ///M TOWN the benefit of the doubt, stand up character on this forum.

If I may wade into the debate, 1) hydrogen is one of several “sustainable” solutions/alternatives to fossil fuel dependence. 2) Toyota is really leading the effort to build sustainable ICE, and I’m all for that…. 3) as ///M town indicated, EV will not be a solution for everyone. There’s no way that will work for two main reasons: apartment dwellers and home street/garage parking (cities). 4) there’s a “developed world”-centric mentality and we can forget about the developing world’s access to - and dependability on - electricity 5) EV is nice and reduces power/energy/fossil fuel usage by 2/3 to 3/4, but true fossil fuel reduction would be an engine that doesn’t require any non-renewable energy source beyond that which is required to build it and supply it. Like a hydrogen powered engine.

The real debate is why a change in fuel source is needed. The rest is just window dressing.

To date, this has not been adequately explained, which is partially connected to the rush to get people into these horrid vehicles.

Over here in the EU, they were trying to ban all ICEs within about 10-15 years. The agenda has nothing to do with a "climate emergency" and much more to do with a reconfiguration of everything in society to go electric, track every possible metric one could track on a human, and geofence movement.

Which is why everything is rushed. Were this a serious effort to deal with a real problem, none of this would go the way it has gone.

Neusser wrote

The real debate is why a change in fuel source is needed. The rest is just window dressing.

To date, this has not been adequately explained, which is partially connected to the rush to get people into these horrid vehicles.

Over here in the EU, they were trying to ban all ICEs within about 10-15 years. The agenda has nothing to do with a "climate emergency" and much more to do with a reconfiguration of everything in society to go electric, track every possible metric one could track on a human, and geofence movement.

Which is why everything is rushed. Were this a serious effort to deal with a real problem, none of this would go the way it has gone.

Correct. And, who has been sitting back watching the world burn? Toyota.

David70 wrote

See picture below, you don't need a single family home to have a charger. Apartment complex near me is advertising they have them now. Go ahead and explain your plan for building hydrogen stations across the nation and the huge problem of refueling costs far higher than gasoline. Only gets worse when you look at the cost to refuel an EV vs a hydrogen vehicle.



https://www.hydrogeninsight.com/transport/analysis-it-is-now-almost-14-times-more-expensive-to-drive-a-toyota-hydrogen-car-in-california-than-a-comparable-tesla-ev/2-1-1519315

I’m not proposing building hydrogen stations across the nation. My only comment was that fuel cells are a better option than batteries.

I’m impressed with your photo. I give you credit for providing the first answer anyone has ever given when I’ve posed the question in the past, which I’ve done numerous times in the EV thread. Does this actually exist anywhere in the real world? It looks pretty good, but I can tell you in cities like Chicago, New York, Boston, Philadelphia, etc those would be way too vulnerable to vandalism.

Bimmerfun82 wrote

Correct. And, who has been sitting back watching the world burn? Toyota.

They have been quite smart about the whole thing, I agree.

BMW has tried to make and cell hydrogen vehicles for a long time now. I recall reading in Roundel two decades ago about the “Hydrogen 7”. Pictures of refueling at a demo hydrogen station in Germany were included.

Well, BMW never really introduced it. Toyota tried with the Mirai, a car which people only took on because it came with free hydrogen up to some point, making the car disposable when an owner’s free hydrogen credit ran out. Here in Silicon Valley it is tough to get hydrogen, and both here and in LA, the problem is compounded by unreliable supply.

At one point there were only 3 hydrogen production plants in the US, two of which were in TX I believe, and both were offline after unusually severe Winter weather storms a few years back. No hydrogen to be had.

Bad as it might be, EV infrastucture is ahead of hydrogen and doesn’t have the problem of transport of the hydrogen to the stations across distances in the USA which are much larger than in Germany.

tturedraider wrote

And how do you propose that electricity gets to the cars? How many charging stations do you propose the city install on each street that have the ability to charge the individual user for the electricity distributed, that will work reliably, that can’t be disconnected by a$$holes walking down the street, that will stand up to constant use in all kinds of weather conditions and be able to withstand the abuse of vandals and not be destroyed? I’m sure there are still a good number of contingencies I didn’t think about.

We have public charging stations today that already address every concern you listed out. Obviously some do it better than others, but with 10M+ EVs on the roads today globally, this is not some 'future boogeyman', people deal with it all the time.

Alpine Wait wrote

We have public charging stations today that already address every concern you listed out. Obviously some do it better than others, but with 10M+ EVs on the roads today globally, this is not some 'future boogeyman', people deal with it all the time.

Please share them. All the ones that are suitable to be installed every 15 - 20 feet up and down residential streets in big cities across the country. This discussion is turning into something that should be in the EV thread, but I’ll make one more comment. I initially missed a major limitation of the point you made that cities already have electricity to neighborhood street lights. The difference in the amount of electric draw is staggering. The infrastructure doesn’t have the capacity.

“Jeff Schrade, National Coalition for Open Roads -

Facts are Hard Things

- After one trucking company tried to electrify just 30 trucks at a terminal in Joliet, Illinois, local officials shut those plans down, saying they would draw more electricity than is needed to power the entire city.

- A California company tried to electrify 12 forklifts. Not trucks, but forklifts. Local power utilities told them that's not possible.

- Electrification of the entire U.S. vehicle fleet would consume 40.3% of the current electricity demand.

- Current electrical power build-out could expand U.S. transmission capacity by about 15% in the next 10 years.”

tturedraider wrote

Please share them. All the ones that are suitable to be installed every 15 - 20 feet up and down residential streets in big cities across the country. This discussion is turning into something that should be in the EV thread, but I’ll make one more comment. I initially missed a major limitation of the point you made that cities already have electricity to neighborhood street lights. The difference in the amount of electric draw is staggering. The infrastructure doesn’t have the capacity.

“Jeff Schrade, National Coalition for Open Roads -

Facts are Hard Things

- After one trucking company tried to electrify just 30 trucks at a terminal in Joliet, Illinois, local officials shut those plans down, saying they would draw more electricity than is needed to power the entire city.

- A California company tried to electrify 12 forklifts. Not trucks, but forklifts. Local power utilities told them that's not possible.

- Electrification of the entire U.S. vehicle fleet would consume 40.3% of the current electricity demand.

- Current electrical power build-out could expand U.S. transmission capacity by about 15% in the next 10 years.”

Just like we don't have/need a gas pump every 15-20ft down a residential street, we don't need that density of EV chargers.

In 1890, there were also "facts" that the transition from horses to gasoline was going to be a challenge. Didn't stop the innovation or ultimate change. And we're already well upon our way for the transition away from gas.