The Truth about Hydrogen

The Truth about Hydrogen

This episode of Real Engineering is brought
to you by Skillshare, home to over twenty thousand classes that could teach you a new
life skill. As the world grapples to eliminate fossil
fuels from our energy diet, electric cars have seen an incredible boom over the past
few years. Last year, over one million electric cars
were sold around the world. The number of Nissan Leafs, Teslas, and other
electric vehicles in circulation worldwide is now more than three million. And while there are many brands of electric
car to choose from, there are only two choices when it comes to powering electric vehicles:
fuel cells or batteries. Both produce electricity to drive electric
motors, eliminating the pollution and inefficiencies of the fossil fuel powered internal combustion
engine. Both hydrogen and electricity for batteries
can be produced from low­ or zero ­carbon sources, including renewable energy like solar
and wind, and therefore both are being pursued by car manufacturers and researchers as the
possible future of electric vehicles. However, a great debate is being waged by
supporters of each technology. Elon Musk has called hydrogen fuel cell technology
“incredibly dumb,” claiming they’re more of a marketing ploy for automakers than
a long-term solution. In contrast, Japan has announced its intention
to become the world’s first hydrogen society, with the Japanese government and the auto
industry working together to introduce 160 hydrogen stations and 40,000 fuel-cell vehicles
by March 2021. So which is actually better? At first glance, hydrogen seems like an extremely
clever way to power a car. Compressed hydrogen has a specific energy
(aka energy per unit mass) of neary 40,000 watt hours per kilogram. Lithium ion batteries at best have a specific
energy of just 278 wh/kg, but most fall around 167 wh / kg. That’s 236 times as much energy per kg for
hydrogen. And because of its energy density and lightweight
nature, compressed hydrogen and fuel cells can power cars for extended ranges without
adding much weight, which as we saw in our last video is a gigantic road block for incorporating
the technology into the aviation industry. The designers of electric vehicles are caught
in a catch 22 with energy density and range. Each extra kilogram of battery weight to increase
range requires extra structural weight, heavier brakes, a higher torque motor, and in turn
more batteries to carry around this extra mass, This weight compounding limits how far
a battery powered vehicle can travel, until new technology can help reduce the weight
of the batteries. For hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, this weight
compounding is not an issue. Additionally, a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle
can be refueled in under 5 minutes, where a battery powered electric vehicle, like the
Tesla model S, takes over 3 hours to fully recharge. When looking at the range and refuel times
hydrogen can offer, you can see why some car manufacturers are investing in this technology. On the face of it. Hydrogen is a clear winner, but it falls behind
when we start considering the end-to-end production process. While both batteries and hydrogen fuel cells
are both forms of electricity storage, the cost differ drastically. Fully charging a Tesla Model 3 with a 75 kiloWatt
hour battery, costs between 10-12 dollars depending where you live. With a rated range of 500 kilometers, that’s
between 2 and 2.4 cent per kilometer. A great price. In a previous video, I visited a petrol station
that introduced a hydrogen pump, fed by its own on-site production facility. which used off-peak electricity to produce
hydrogen. The hydrogen from this station cost $85 dollars
to fill the 5 kg tank of the Toyota Mirais on site, which had a range of 480 kms. That’s 17.7 cent per kilometer, 8 times
the price. And here lies the problem, Hydrogen simply
requires more energy to produce. To understand the economic viability of hydrogen
let’s dig deeper into the production process. Before any hydrogen vehicle can hit the road,
you first need to produce the hydrogen, but hydrogen is not a readily available energy
source. Even though hydrogen is the most abundant
element in the universe, it is usually stored in water, hydrocarbons, such as methane, and
other organic matter. One of the challenges of using hydrogen as
an energy storage mechanism comes from being able to efficiently extract it from these
compounds. In the US, the majority of hydrogen is produced
through a process called steam reforming. Steam reforming is the process of combining
high-temperature steam with natural gas to extract hydrogen. While steam reforming is the most common method
of industrial hydrogen production, it requires a good deal of heat and is wildly inefficient. Hydrogen produced by steam reforming actually
has less energy than the natural gas that the steam reforming began with. And while hydrogen fuel cells themselves don’t
produce pollution, this process does. So if we want to assume a future scenario
with as little carbon emission as possible, this method won’t cut it. Another method to produce hydrogen is electrolysis
– separating the hydrogen out of water using an electric current. While the electricity needed for this process
can be provided from renewable sources, it requires even more energy input than steam
reforming. You end up losing 30% of the energy from the
original energy put in from the renewables when you carry out electrolysis. So we are sitting at 70% energy efficiency
from hydrogen fuel cells if traditional electrolysis is used, before the car even starts its engine. A slightly more efficient method of producing
hydrogen is polymer exchange membrane electrolysis. Using this method, energy efficiencies can
reach up to 80%, with the added benefit of being produced on site, which we will get
to in a moment. But this is still a 20% loss of energy from
the original electricity from the renewables. Some experts say the efficiency of PEM electrolysis
is expected to reach 82-86% before 2030, which is a great improvement, but still well short
of batteries charging efficiency at 99%. [1] A 19% difference in production costs doesn’t
explain the difference in costs yet, so where else are we losing energy. The next hurdle in getting hydrogen fuel cell
vehicles on the road is the transport and storage of the pure hydrogen. If we assume the hydrogen is produced on site,
like it was for this petrol station, then we eliminate one energy sink, but the cost
of storage is just as problematic. Hydrogen is extremely low density as a gas
and liquid, and so in order to achieve adequate energy density, we have to increase its actual
density. We can do this in two ways. We can compress the hydrogen to 790 times
atmospheric pressure, but that takes energy, about 13% of the total energy content of the
hydrogen itself. Alternatively we can turn hydrogen into liquid,
cryogenically. The advantage of hydrogen liquefaction is
that a cryogenic hydrogen tank is much lighter than a tank that can hold pressurized hydrogen. But again, hydrogen’s physical properties
means hydrogen is harder to liquefy than any other gas except helium. Hydrogen is liquified by reducing its temperature
to -253°C, with an efficiency loss of 40%, once you factor in the added weight of the
refrigerators and the refrigeration itself. So pressurisation is a better option at a
13% energy loss. Once the hydrogen is produced and compressed
to a liquid or gas, a viable hydrogen infrastructure requires that hydrogen be able to be delivered
from where it’s produced to the point of end-use, such as a vehicle refueling station. Where the hydrogen is produced can have a
big impact on the cost and best method of delivery. For example, a large, centrally located hydrogen
production facility can produce hydrogen at a lower cost because it is producing more,
but it costs more to deliver the hydrogen because the point of use is farther away. In comparison, distributed production facilities
produce hydrogen on site so delivery costs are relatively low, but the cost to produce
the hydrogen is likely to be higher because production volumes are less. While there are some small-scale, on-site
hydrogen production facilities being installed at refuelling pumps, such as the station mentioned
in the last hydrogen video. until this infrastructure is widespread, we
have to assume that the majority of hydrogen is being transported by truck or pipeline,
where we know that energy losses can range from 10% up to 40%. In comparison, assuming that the electricity
that we use for charging the batteries comes completely from renewable resources (like
solar or wind), we just have to consider the transmission losses in the grid. Using the United States grid as a reference
for typical grid losses, the average loss is only 5%. So in the best case scenario for hydrogen,
using the most efficient means of production and transport, we lose 20% of energy during
PEM electrolysis, and around 13% for compression and storage, amounting to a 33% loss. In other systems, this could be as much as
56%. For battery power, up to this point, we have
lost just 6% to the grid and recharging. Bringing our best case efficiency difference
to 27% and our worst case to 50%. The next stage of powering electric vehicles
is what is called the tank to wheel conversion efficiency. For hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, once the
hydrogen is in the tank, it must be re-converted into electric power. This is done via a fuel cell, which essentially
works like a PEM electrolyser, but in reverse. In a PEM fuel cell, hydrogen gas flows through
channels to the anode, where a catalyst causes the hydrogen molecules to separate into protons
and electrons. Once again the membrane only allows protons
to pass through it, while electrons flow through an external circuit to the cathode.This flow
of electrons is the electricity that is used to power the vehicles electric motors. If the fuel cell is powered with pure hydrogen,
it has the potential to be up to around 60% efficient, with most of the wasted energy
lost to heat. Like hydrogen fuel cells, batteries also come
with inefficiencies and energy losses. The grid provides AC current while the batteries
store the charge in DC. So to convert AC to DC, we need a charger. Using the Tesla Model S as an example, its
peak charger efficiency is around 92%. The Tesla model S runs on AC motors; therefore,
to convert the DC current supplied by the batteries into AC current, an inverter has
to be used with an efficiency of roughly 90%. Additionally, lithium ion batteries can lose
energy due to leakage. A good estimate for the charging efficiency
of a lithium ion battery is 90%. All of these factors combined lead to a total
efficiency of around 75%. However, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles also
have some of these same inefficiencies. Any kind of electrolysis requires DC current,
and therefore, a rectifier will be required to convert the AC current from the grid to
DC. The conversion efficiency here is 92%. We also need to convert the DC current produced
by the fuel cell to AC to power the motor through an inverter with an efficiency of
90%. Finally, the efficiency of the motor must
be considered for both fuel cell and battery powered vehicles. Currently, this is around 90-95% for both
of them, which is amazing when you consider that internal combustion engines running on
petrol have an efficiency of only around 20-30%. If we add up all these inefficiencies and
compare current generation batteries, to the best and worst case scenario of current gen
hydrogen. We can see how they measure up. Even with the BEST case scenario. Not taking into account any transport due
to onsite production, and assuming very high electrolysis efficiency of 80%, and assuming
a HIGH fuel cell efficiency of 80%, hydrogen still comes out at less than half the efficiency. The worst case scenario is even worse off. So while you may be able to go further on
one fill-up of hydrogen in your fuel cell vehicle over a battery powered electric vehicle,
the cost that is needed to deliver that one fill up would be astronomically higher compared
to charging batteries due to these energy losses and efficiencies. Based on our worst case scenario, we would
expect the cost per kilometre to be about 3.5 times greater for hydrogen, but as we
saw earlier it’s actual 8 times the price. So additional costs of production unrelated
to efficiencies are obviously at play. The cost of construction of the facility is
one and the profit the station will take from sale is another. For now, these inefficiencies and costs are
driving the market, where most investment and research is going into battery powered
electric vehicles. So which wins? Both are equally more green than internal
combustion engines, assuming equal renewable resources are used to power them. Fuel cells allow for fast fill up times and
long ranges; a big advantage. But battery powered vehicles might catch up
in range by the time there are enough hydrogen stations to ever make fuel cell vehicles viable. While fuel cells are efficient relative to
combustion engines, they are not as efficient as batteries. They may make more sense for operation disconnected
from the grid or as we saw in our last video using hydrogen for planes actually could make
a lot of sense, but once again that’s a topic for another video. For now, battery powered electric vehicles
seem to be the sensible choice going forward in the quest for pollution free consumer transport. As battery-powered cars become more common,
we’re also starting to see self-driving cars become the norm. If the job of driver is slowly automated away
and consumers have a bunch of free time to read or watch online video, it may be wise
to use that opportunity to start learning new skills and Skillshare is great place to
do it. You could take this course on Photoshop for
beginners and learn a skill that has helped this channel immensely. You may have noticed that we introduced a
new thumbnail design the channel. This done in part because the channels views
we trending downwards for past 2 months, despite putting extra effort into production quality. We needed to rethink our strategy for branding,
and I felt the blueprints strength was that it was easily recognisable as mine, but they
all also look so similar it’s difficult to tell when there is a new video. So we got to work in photoshop to use the
strengths of blueprint design and build on its weaknesses and we can up with this transitioning
effect. Taking designs to reality, which I think fits
the theme channel perfectly. We saw immediate effects with the views on
our last video jumping 80% compared on our 2 month average. This is the power of illustration and you
can learn how to use software like Photoshop and Illustrator on Skillshare These days you can teach yourself pretty much
any skill online and Skillshare is a fantastic place to do it. With over 20,000 classes ranging from animation,
electronics, programming and much more. The classes follow a clear learning curve,
so you just click and watch without having to curate your own learning experience. A Premium Membership begins around $10 a month
for unlimited access to all courses, but the first 1000 people to sign up with this link
will get their first 2 months for free. So ask yourself right now. What skill have you been putting off learning. What project have you been dreaming of completing,
but you aren’t sure if you have the skills to do it. Why not start right now and sign up to Skillshare
using the link below to get your first 2 months free. You have nothing to lose and a valuable life
skill to gain. As usual thanks for watching and thank you
to all my Patreon supporters. If you would like to see more from me, the
links to my twitter, facebook, discord server, subreddit and instagram pages are below. I’m about to do a Q&A on the subject matter
of this video on my instagram stories, so if you are interested in having some questions
answered the link for that is belo

Only registered users can comment.

  1. One billion vehicles on the road world wide, three million alternate fuel vehicles on the road, what’s that? 0.03 percent.

  2. one h2 producing panel can produce 250 liter per day, almost for free, 40 panels is enough to provide a home with warmth and energy, and powers a car a year long.

  3. elon musk perpetual series of failures, hope he doesnt run out of money before
    something succeeds so they dont bury him under the junk yard of teslas, not surprised
    he doesnt want hydrogen competition just when he finally might have a good enough battery
    rather have hydrogen any day myself…truth hurts

  4. You are acting like today is what will be tomorrow. Both have a positive future but Electric vehicles have benefited more from research dollars during the Obama years when hydrogen trailed behind.

  5. You stupid gnome, hydrogen price now is very low and it will be lower. It is CLEANER energy, no child labor, no poisoning nature by heavy metals and in the end it will be CHEAPER. Or you think Japan is stupid?

  6. think you could call us something a little different than "consumers" you engineering douche bag. WE ARE PEOPLE. THE HUMAN POPULATION. JUST LIKE YOU. AND EVERYONE ELSE

  7. Does the hydrogen cars needs the same raw material to produce ? Maybe Japan invests in hydrogen to not be dependent of other countries ressources.

  8. It so funny how Tesla haven’t explain how batteries are made from, I think batteries are more polluted then gas because of all the chemicals that use to make it, but no one talk about it

  9. I mean, why not both in a new age hybrid system? Have a medium to short range LiOn battery for commuting (say maybe 40-60 mile range) that can be charged off of A/C grid power. Then also having a hydrogen tank with a fuel cell for longer range trips. Ideally, for everyday use around town you only use your battery and charge it every night. However, you have hydrogen in the tank ready to go should you need to drive further than your short battery range. Seems to me to get the best of both worlds. You could refuel in a jiffy should you need to, but for everyday non road trip scenarios you can get by on a small LiOn battery. The only problems I see would be long term storage of hydrogen in the vehicle itself and space/weight for all of this. However, we essentially managed the packaging problem with today's plug in hybrid which have more complexity, weight, and space requirements than the system described above.

  10. Don't forget that Hydrogen is highly explosive so you need good security and solid construction on each filling station. If not you will have Hindenburgs all over the place.

  11. Hydrogen is energy dense but production of Hydrogen leaves 70 percent carbondioxide. This is not good. Finding different battery sources are required suck as graphene, it should be cheap and reliable.

  12. Why bother losing energy charging batteries with hydrogen when it is combustible like gasoline. Use it to combust cylinders the same way and get more power and immediacy. Yes hydrogen is explosive but so is gasoline. If I'm gonna go out in an explosion I would rather it be quick and over with and not burn to death in gasoline. Ha ha ha

  13. You assume that hydrogen is produced on industrial sites then compressed then transported to gas stations which is a waste of energy. Hydrogen can directly be produced and stored in every gas station thanks to electrolizers directly connected to the grid with green electricity contracts. We must keep in mind that green electricity from wind and solar is often wasted when the electricity grid is saturated. This excess electricity can be stored in hydrogen form at very low price instead of beeing freely wasted.

  14. …why would you say that FUEL CELL (DC) must be converted to (AC) for the motor(s)?? The opposite is rather the case, being DC motors the preferred E-engine type, which by the way, also regenerates some of its braking back into … charging DC from those motors (acting as brakes) into the batteries.

  15. Water = oxygen / hydrogen. We are at a new age. Pour billions of money to research how to mass produce hydrogen from water seperation is not impossible.

  16. Hydrogen is incrediblely dangerous. For the environment. The byproduct of hydrogen cars is water. Pure. Clean water. The earth is a closed biosphere. Let's add tons and tons of water to that. You think we have storms now just wait. It will raise ocean levels and destroy delicate desert environments. Case in point. The proliferation of air conditioning units, swimming pools and lawn watering in Phoenix raised the humidity level to a point that began to degrade the desert environment. Imagine Los Angeles with millions of water spewing cars. Did I mention that the most abundant greenhouse gas is water vapor? Yeah lets add tons more.

  17. All your arguments are wrong. Humans don't fucking care amount effeciancy if we can produce electricity for shit.

    Wireless charging has 60 percent and everyone uses it. :O

  18. wow. if we focused on making electricity from petrol at 90% efficiency, we'd be able to use existing petrol infrastructure and get vehicles with massive range.

  19. We don't care to loose 30% of the energy provided by the sun or the wind – to produce hydrogen. We can still get more energy from that sources that we need. Ecology is vital.

  20. So there's no mention of the car having its own Hydrogen production or HHO Generator. Why are we stuck with the idea that we have to go to someone or a third party to fill/charge our vehicles. If the vehicle produced the Hydrogen as it needed it then there is no need for Fill/Charge stations, or big heavy pressurized tanks. The HHO Generator would run off the 12V or 24V system the car or truck has and the output of Hydrogen would be regulated by the rpm of the engine. either running off the alternator or Power Regulator designated for the HHO generator. There is a little more in depth to this process but for simplicity measures.
    The beauty of this is that to fill up you would just put water, simple H2O in the reservoir. It would be ideal to put in distilled water with electrolytes but clean potable water would work.
    Eventually the plates in the HHO generator will need to be replaced but it could be designed in a way that the plates or generator can be changed out as simple as an oil change, and these "modules" could be mass produced by simple labor workers. Drain the water from the generator, open reservoir, disconnect the positive and negative terminals, remove the Module, replace with new one, reconnect the terminals close reservoir, and refill with water.
    If you wanted to get fancy you could add a second reservoir that would release small amounts of electrolytes and an inline filter in case there are any impurities in the water but even that wouldn't be heavy modifications. You could also install a small tank with a shut off valve so if you did run out of water on a trip you could switch to a pressurized Hydrogen tank and get to some water.
    That is just my 2 cents on it, thanks for your time!!

  21. There is zero efficiency for a concept that is destroying earth and wont be living for long, not a quarter as long as petrol cars. Just because there are even NOW no ressources left to build these types of "Akkus". It`s already done guys, dont compare dead topics, neither Litium-Ion nor HYDROGEN is efficient. What it needs is a new way to produce and store electricity, that`s what it needs ever since, thats why people like Nikola Tesla were here and invented solutions in the early 1900hrds….

  22. all very good information and well researched. . but, what is a life expectancy of a battery ( amount of charge cycles/time/expected life span) and the cost of replacement and manufacturing of these batteries and the environmental impact vs the a hydrogen cell?

  23. Guys! Am I the only one notice, feel like listening to a robot speech no intonation or stopping… worse than a lecture..

  24. The internal combustion engine, naturally aspirated, is a modern marvel. It has brought us prosperity, helped win wars both past and present, sustains construction of a nation, provides backup power in emergencies and so forth. The only reason people have negative feelings about it is plain ignorance.

  25. Your comparison is not wrong.

    But you failed to address the environmental and sustainability issues. In both these cases, hydrogen wins! (Also, ultra or super capacitors can be used in a hydrogen fuel cell car just as well as in a battery car).

    Lithium batteries, or other types of chemical storages will still be vital for various applications, but mostly as backup or if needed long life energy storage.

    We need to start investing in the correct long term solutions. But then I always viewed Tesla as Elons way of furthering various technologies more than anything.
    It sure is comming in handy for Starship.

  26. so a small high speed zeppelin for Diplomats and politicians (max crew of 5)
    which uses hydrogen as a lifting gas, a fuel cell to power the flight and regulate buoyancy, and a Stirling Engine to recharge the entire system, using the body of the zeppelin itself.

    is a bad idea?

  27. Did you even consider the fact that the electricity required to charge the battery is itself prpduced somewhere with a cost and pollution

  28. This way of looking at this topic seems a little dumb or childish, if we look at this thing like complex system it seems more useful and logic, to get hydrogen you need water and electricity, then the hydrogen you can use to make electricity and trust, all you need is to fill up you gas tank with water like we do it now with petrol and making electricity an trust. looks more logic ?

  29. 5:03 You forgot that the power to gas method is a good way to store excess renuewable energy during power peaks, and most countries already have a good pipeline infrastructure to distribute that gas.

    In the end i would´ve liked speculation about the future of the three car engine options we seem to have right now, but the neutral view is generally really refreshing on YT.
    And i think you stick too much to the numbers. Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles have multiple upsides that deserve to be noted. They tend to be as safe, if not safer than battery or fossile fuel vehicles ( (sorry it´s in german, on the left is the hydrogen car)) and hydrogen production is bound to increase due to the change of coke to hydrogen as reductant in steal production (ecological reasons), anyway.

    The range is higher than that of battery vehicles and not much less than fossile fuel vehicles.

    … To name a few
    The biggest problem that hydrogen fuel cell cars are facing is the high production and refill cost and also the non existant and costly refilling infrastructure.

    Could be solved through scaling.

  30. As much as I trust and respect your research, can you please share your citations to the numbers you were referring to? It would help to read some of the research papers ourselves.

  31. Riversimple here in Wales is challenging this. Worth a look. Lovely car. The secret is lightness.

  32. The market want cars that are lighter and more rigid and affordable atvthe same time.That requires some expensive alloys.
    I wonder if we are getting those alloys cheap from heavily polluting sources like China therefore negating any emissions saved by better fuel economy.

  33. The Truth about Electric Vehicles is that their high-performance batteries require lithium, and over half of the global reserves of automotive-grade lithium have already been consumed by the cell phone industry, and now the automobile industry is competing for the remaining lithium reserves — which requires destroying some of the Earth's remaining ecosystems in the process. While the video provides an excellent technical comparison, it fails to mention that lithium is not a sustainable, ecologically acceptable or safe alternatives to using hydrogen fuel cell systems in vehicles. The video also failed to mention that the high-efficiency numbers for electric battery systems also degrade with every charge, as anyone who uses a cell for very long phone knows. This is why they must replaced, which is also a highly-significant cost factor that was not mentioned. It is important to note that when the primordial proteins on the Earth were initially extracting the hydrogen they needed for metabolism from hydrocarbon molecules in the primordial soup, with a conversion efficiency of approximately 40 percent. But because the hydrocarbons were non-renewable, they were rapidly being consumed by the exponentially-increasing numbers of proteins and other bacteria and microbes they created were obviously aware they were heading into a mass-extinction event. And given proteins are the masters of molecular biology and transhydrogenation in every living organism, from viruses to humans, they created a new complex molecule called chlorophyll, which allowed the proteins to use specific wavelengths of sunlight to separate the hydrogen from the oxygen in water molecules, and while the efficiency was only about one percent, IT WAS SUSTAINABLE, and the protein's were able to survive and prosper for another three billion years. Although the future of proteins is once again in doubt, because they are now being mass-murdered and dissolved by oil-based hydrocarbons like gasoline into super-sticky amyloid plaques, which Wikipedia reports are now known to be at the molecular heart of dozens of terrible diseases, including cancer, Alzheimer's in adults and Autism in children, given babies are now born with these dreaded amyloid plaques in their brains and bodies. So the lesson is simple: It's not efficiency that is important, it is sustainability — which means living in harmony with the Earth's protein-based life-support systems and species. And as the proteins knew very well, the key to survival and sustainability was hydrogen, the most abundant element in the Universe. -HB

  34. What about lifecycle? If the batteries in an EV are anything like my laptop battery, they’re in bad shape after 5 years. I imagine a fuel cell has a longer usable life and less waste?

  35. @Real Engineering
    I am currently working on a large project during my master thesis, where I work with wind power and hydrogen storage. You are correct with certain aspect of your analysis. Its hard to debate that Hydrogen for small cars are currently viable.I would however love if you started looking more into hydrogen for either energy storage or as elektrofuel for trucks(Look at NikolaOne).
    Right now there are a huge boom in USA where you combine green energy together with hydrogen as storage.
    I think the viewers of this channel would love this

  36. Did we take about lithium mining and environmental cost? There are a few quoted figures that seem biased. Good video though.

  37. Better for environment. Which one when concidering manufacturing the items needed för hydrogen vs battery. The pollution when getting the minerals for the battery and taking care of the battery when it no longer can be used. Should have been included in the comparison, since the speaker talks about environment.

  38. Fun fact, electric battery-powered cars are twice as efficient as normal cars even when coal-powered. Simply because combustion engines are always very inefficient at small levels.

  39. Hydrogen alone is a dumb idea!

    Every way you turn you need more energy input to compress (store), burn(steam/gas production) produce in every secondary production process.

    It does however work well to store excess solar power generated by using that power for electrolysis to create bottled hydrogen for later use.

  40. You hit on my debunk of hfc inefficiency of creation @ 14:55 precisely while explaining it. Would the wind turbine blades shown spinning at 14:55 have to turn 27 times to create the hydrogen for
    HFC cars as opposed maybe only 19 times to charge the Tesla model 3? WHO CARES! The wind is free! God doesn't charge per each "gust" unit. Also any slight miniscule extra wear on the turbine would be negligeable. So Elon Musk would sit for 3 hours instead of 5 minutes range replenish to save 9 spins of a 4mw wind turbine blade?…. which would take all of 2 minutes? NOW whose stupid?

  41. Great video! I wonder if Hydrogen Internal Combustion Engine (HICE) with better catalytic converter could do the trick though. Future video idea?

  42. Batteries are in everything, bring the cost of production and everything else down with it. If hydrogen became more mainstream, the cost would come down like everything else.

  43. Comparison seems wrong as it excludes battery manufacturing cost, difficulty to recycle batteries and finite supply of raw materials..

  44. You miss the cost of my time to fill up the battery vs. the storage tank. My time is worth about $50 per hour (in real cost to my employer) or about $1000 per hr in my personal time lost. Factor the facts of needing 1/12 the time to fill up my hydrogen tank, vs 1 full hour to only get 80% fill on a battery. Then do the math.

  45. Just a note for those considering carbon emissions (which I consider silly since through most of the past several million years CO2 levels were over 2.5 times HIGHER than current levels per ice cores and the geological record)… the USA has reduced its carbon dioxide emissions over the past 2-3 years back to 1992 levels, whereas most other countries, including those which are still in the Kyoto CO2 reduction agreement, have increased their CO2 emissions.

  46. 100 mpg with fossil fuel is attainable. Just ask the dead guy who invented it. Shell oil offered him a lot of money to buy it. It used a carburetor. Notice no cars with carburetors anymore.

  47. All of this discussion becomes moot once the socialists take control. They will determine who needs independent transportation, and it won’t be you or me. You’ll be allowed to use public transportation but must live within a few blocks of your government mandated job.

  48. I Trust Elon Musk. Tesla batteries are better and better every day, consider the Maxwell factory, and we can put solar cells in different sites. Cobalt mining and that stuff will be replaced with some chemical stuff one day, no problem. At the same time Hydrogen can be pursued, but at a certain point there will be a winner.

  49. This video is brought to you by Tesla….
    It's an okayish introduction into the theory, but incredibly short-sighted. You forgot the production of batteries, the strain on the grid if 10m people want to charge theri EVs at once…
    Plus the fact that hydrogen is perfect for saving energy, e.g. from overproduction from renewable surces. Batteries just aren't suited for those applications….

  50. I don’t want too hang around for 3 hrs too change my car my gas one fill up fast and it won’t take me a long time too get there

  51. What you have missed is that the total CO2 production in use and manufacture of Batteries is Huge, I don't know the number but you should provide that number in your video. After you factor in the cost of C02 in making the renewable energy and the C02 cost of making the fuel cell. The operation of combustion or conversion to power in Hydrogen is a "0" carbon emitter. Not so for batteries . Not to mention that you are depleting the natural resources required to make the batteries which at the moment are not recyclable. On a large scale Lithium used to make batteries now, would be the equivalent of the oil economy Now. Hydrogen is the most abundant element on earth and the universe. Hydrogen burning in any form produces Water a resource that we need to live. Any other chemical reaction causes toxic effects and pollutes the world. Factor that in Please in your comparison.

  52. The problem with hydrogen is that it is more expensive vs pure electrical energy. However, hydrogen is leagues ahead of battery in city environments. Who here lives in an X story appartment with limited to no access to even a normal outlet at street level, much less a high voltage one needed for quick charge. I for one prefer to spend more $$$ on a full tank of gas than to spend an eon searching for a street level outlet and another one to recharge

  53. What about the mining of cobalt and lithium?

    There are a ton of great reasons why hydrogen is better…

    We can absorb the inefficiencies with renewables…

    If you convert mining costs into inefficiencies automatically puts hydrogen in the lead…assuming both are using renewables…

  54. So while my comment is old, you didnt cover the leakage loss of hydrogen tanks. Because hydrogen is so small, it can leak past seals and leak though the metal containers themselves. So even storing hydrogen, you lose energy. Much like batteries.

    "Indigenous people in the lithium triangle worry that the high levels of water needed to produce lithium — as much as half a million (500,000) gallons per ton (2,000 lbs) — may cut into the already limited water supply"

  56. Good video, but I was missing the production of Lithium batteries in the equation. It's a one time cost, but maybe there are estimates of how long a lithium car battery is used before it gets replaced to make it into a CO2/km cost. What's the expected recycling quota once the batteries lost too much capacity? 15 minutes is way to short for an in depth comparison. 🙂

  57. I am working as an electric taxi driver. I can say — the electric cars are just disaster. My car is Nissan Leaf. Its made in 2015. Not very old. But when I charge it full (it takes an hour with a FAST recharger) the meter shows you can drive 120 km. BUT its not true at all!!! Actually I can drive maximum 60 km (40 miles) when I am really careful and SLOW (30 mph); and only 30 km (20 miles) when I have to make somw longer and faster (50 mph) rides. So the batteries have lost more than 50% of their value within some years!!!

  58. Yeah battery is better, but in a long run, Battery is more expensive because the price of battery, Just imagine a Hybrid Car Mercedes S clss battery cost USD 30K!!!! can last up to 8 years!!! that is Hybrid not count Fully Battery

  59. everybody is doing it wrong, 100% electric or in this case 100% hydrogen.. just stop. theres a gasoline 3 seat ugly ass sports car that gets 1200 miles on 20 gallons of gas using a 96,000 rpm turbine to charge 2 massive electric motors but thats too damn expensive for now but a good idea none the less. instead what we need to look at now is a gasoline/HHO hybrid that uses a tank of water and through electrolysis creating HHO be injected into the engine with the fuel to significantly boost the mpg nearing or exceeding 100mpg depending on the type of vehicle and its purpose, and all at 90%-95% fuel burn far exceeding the strictest emissions standards. heres the thing, thats all at a 2 mason jars of water rigged up in the back all DIYed in older cars with originally shitty mpg not engines and vehicles specifically designed for it. right now this is the way to go and unlike natural gas its not exponentially toxic to the environment and all living things to produce. nor like the toxic environment created by mining materials for batteries and not to mention all the coal and natural gas burned by the plants to actually make all that electricity. hell even at 100% hydrogen take a look at Pakistan, they have converted nearly all of their diesels to run off 100% natural gas and getting better mpg than actual diesel. their vehicles are mostly all diesel because at one point diesel was much cheaper than gas and now most cant afford either. there was a few guys that actually did 100% HHO but where "suicided". one man actually got a patent and when he refused to sell to a big oil company he and his patent suddenly poofed. another made a conversion kit for any vehicle and had a 100% electrolysis buggy, he and his buggy and boxes of conversion kits suddenly poofed too. i think it was Indonesia but a guy made a 100% electrolysis motorbike that got insane mpg and he made a few videos like the others and the government paid him to shut up, i wonder if hes still alive. seriously the only reason electric cars exist is because big oil still makes a profit from crude oil for power plants and government and big oil can control peoples ability to travel by electricity. and that i bet you is the real reason behind the purposeful power outages in commiefornia, its a test run. solar you say? well its hooked to the grid so for the majority it cant be used during an outage. and in many places people are taxed and charged for the power their panels create connected to the grid or not. hell you didnt even mention the cost of batteries both to make them, buy them, and their toxic waste as their life span is rather short.

  60. The cost of producing hydrogen is coming way down very quickly. Plugging in EV's to a power source in the rain could create serious problems.

  61. Please mention that gasoline powered engines can be converted to use hydrogen with a change of carburator. Changing carburators solves economic and environmental impacts that you haven't presented.

  62. everyone says you have to go to a pump to get hydrogen but you can make it your self and we can use solar panels to make hydrogen .

  63. Well the problem is like the batteries degrade over time. It’s like having ur fuel tank get smaller and smaller over a period of 10 years. My laptop is about 4 -5 years old and it’s warning me to replace to battery soon. It also last about two hours a day compared to its 12 hours when I got it. Idk about you but the production of battery is very costly especially to the environment.

  64. Hydrogen is pretty good. This is how u solve it. Use nuclear power plants as they have the best Co2 to KWph than any other form of energy. Yes even factoring in the mining and the recourse needed to build the plant. And use that electricity to make hydrogen.

  65. I can conclude in one sentence from your video that hydrogen powered car is expensive. 2.2 cents per mile vs 17.7 cents . But I would definitely like to go for hydrogen powered car because extra 15 cents cost is worth it when you consider fast refueling , only 5 minutes . The extensive infrastructure would reduce the cost dramatically

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *