Thread by @AukeHoekstra

I agree there is a place for hydrogen in mobility.
I just think it's probably a very small place.

I think this piece of @Toyota chief scientist Gill Pratt is heavily skewed toward hydrogen in order to make it seem more important. Let me show you.
medium.com/toyotaresearch…

Charging speed is limited by the so called C rate of battery cells.
Simply put: larger vehicles with more cells can stomach bigger chargers.
So big trucks will charge just as fast as small cars.

And of course 90% of charging is done while parked so speed isn't an issue there.

I remember how better place imagined that we would swap batteries to overcome charging time. These days are gone and 60 minutes is simply BS. I think in 2030, new EVs coming out can charge 80% of their range within ten minutes. For something you do occasionally that's a non issue

What also bugs me is that H2 proponents compare the battery weight of an entire lithium battery with the weight of unpackaged hydrogen. But it's the hydrogen tank that dominates the weight, which is one of the reasons fuel cell vehicles are currently not (much) lighter.

Don't get me wrong: if you need to be able to travel very LONG distances without the ability to replenish energy, hydrogen has a clear advantage, esp. liquified. That's why it's great for long distance ships and planes. But required RANGE is much more important than vehicle size.

Also, the size comparison is very deceptive. Batteries can be packaged anywhere you like while lowering center of gravity. And batteries are continuing to get more compact.

Rounded H2 tanks take away more practical space than just their content.

Again a very skewed comparison.

Also, if you have to compress hydrogen you probably won't get 70% efficiency.

More importantly, fuel cells are about 60% efficient. If you also include motor losses you are at 55% or so. So the losses are much bigger.

The 90% of EVs is correct though.

So I agree we should not demonize hydrogen cars. If they give battery electric vehicles competition I'm all for it because both can be very good for the climate and there is a place for both.

But let's not skew the facts to make hydrogen seem more attractive than it is.