Toyota Developed A Liquid Hydrogen Combustion Engine!

[@EngineeringExplained]

**NOTE** A couple interesting points not discussed in the video: 1). Toyota looked at other pump options (turbo pump w/ spinning blades, versus reciprocating piston). They chose the reciprocating option. 2). Why do you need a pump at all? Why not rely on the pressure generated from heated hydrogen as it changes from liquid to gas? Well, because the flow requirement is way too high. You're using a ~150 liter tank in the course of about 30 minutes. At 80% fill, that's over a gallon of liquid hydrogen per minute. You need a pump to flow that much liquid to the engine. 3). Why does it take so long to replace the pump? ~3.5 hours!? It is not at all a simple process. Toyota describes what must happen. Remember, the pump is inside the hydrogen tank, so the process is as follows: drain the remaining hydrogen from the tank, fill the tank with an inert gas (nitrogen, in this case), replace the pump, remove the nitrogen, fill with gaseous hydrogen, then fill with liquid hydrogen. The process is very time consuming (took 4 hours the first time, 3 hours the second time, during the race). If you enjoyed this, I have numerous related videos on the subject to learn more! Toyota's Gaseous H2 Engine - kzbin.info/www/bejne/aXqzg2hmYtiihKM BMW's V12 Hydrogen Engine - kzbin.info/www/bejne/d6DYiGyVn96Nmc0 Toyota's V8 Hydrogen Engine - kzbin.info/www/bejne/rHvNfKqJe56aipo Hydrogen Engines = Bad Idea - kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z3LNomdspq2jZsU Gas vs Hydrogen Engines - kzbin.info/www/bejne/omeodKqIo69jick Hydrogen Rotary Engine - kzbin.info/www/bejne/i17RZn9mmL2Wpsk The Problem With Synthetic Fuel - kzbin.info/www/bejne/ZpWTfoOdbKmrmLs

[@sparkgrid]

Thanks Jason! You're The Best! :D

[@davefroman4700]

Wake me up when you realize that H2 is corrosive, will cost 50% more and result in an engine that lasts half as long. Oh and btw? The fuel tanks? Cannot be mass produced. They have to be assembled by hand. Good luck getting the costs down.

[@Werdna12345]

Thanks for the video and awesome explanations! 2. I’m not sure about this. Why not have the tank pressurized by pressurized gas cylinders or tapping off the vaporizer?

[@Winnetou17]

About 3) Can't they simply replace the whole tank with one that has a new pump ? And then fill it with hidrogen ?

[@lynnmckenney1987]

Didn't Honda have the FCX Clarity on the roads of California around a decade ago as well?

[@R2debo_]

The fact that Yamaha's helping design this engine makes me so excited because every time they touch an engine that will go into a Toyota something legendary gets made.

[@toyotaprius79]

Legendary would be creating climate collapse because it wasn't affordable not to

[@mixswist]

I think Yamaha, Subaru and Mazda are in because Toyota own some shares in company. I am sure Yamaha only help to test Hydrogen combustion motocycle engine (also marine and plane) not car engine.

[@Fee.1]

Yamaha doesn’t miss, designing solo or in conjunction. R6/R1 are living legends

[@Xayuap]

​@@mixswist Lexus LFA enters the chat

[@jsleeio]

like the cheating WRC cars!

[@Cyrillcito]

I just propose for F1 cars to race around using liquid hydrogen by towing along a 700 liter tank on a trailer. That sure would make the race more interesting

[@jsleeio]

those Airstream trailers were ahead of their time!

[@zbyszanna]

Maybe you can spray the hydrogen onto the moving cars?

[@WARnTEA]

What if you gave each car 3 small trailers of liquid hydrogen that follows behind them like the bananas in mariokart and then when they empty one tank that can release the banana to hit another car.

[@HCkev]

But then they could also make Formula-E where they tow a massive battery😂

[@jsleeio]

@@WARnTEA this would definitely get me watching F1 again

[@zwgrafakhsandrianos7784]

Massive respect to Toyota for saying "we haven't made much progress"...

[@waynerussell6401]

They have not made progress on solid state batteries or any other aspect of BEVs or advanced drive trains resulting in terrible ROIC of 3.49% cf Tesla at 24.6%! "Taking the skin off the Model Y, it was truly a work of art. It's unbelievable," "It's a whole different manufacturing philosophy. We need a new platform designed as a blank-sheet EV." Toyota tear down engineers.

[@reinbeers5322]

@@waynerussell6401 Tesla and Toyota are vastly different companies. Toyota produces way more cars and has done so for decades.

[@ALIENdrifter66]

@@waynerussell6401 Do you realize that Toyota has partnerships with some of the most important battery manufacturers, like Panasonic, so they don't have to develop their own batteries, they just work with Panasonic to get what they need. Tesla is a small company that can perform fast movements, Toyota is the biggest car manufacturer, they provide global solutions, not just cars for the rich people of the first World. Also Toyota had to help Tesla for many years, they had a big part of the company and had an important manufacturing technology agreement. Toyota is a consolidated manufacturer while Tesla is a technology based company, not really a car manufacturer, the fact that they have painted cars outside, their low testing numbers and outrageous failure numbers prove that. In terms of hydrogen fuel cell cars, Toyota is by far the leading brand, and that's a really important technology, as hydrogen allows you to store energy in a way that batteries can't. It uses less mining intensive resources, it's easier to lower the vehicle's weight, allows for fast fuel fills. Up to now it has proven to be safer than EVs, although it may sound crazy for many.

[@waynerussell6401]

@@reinbeers5322Size mitigates against change. Unless change is the company culture. * Leadership Team Does Not Work as ONE (VAG) * The Internal Networks Are Disconnected * Employees Do Not Commit to the Company * The Key Stakeholders Do Not Support the Change (3% of employees shape the commitment of 90% of their colleagues) * Leadership Does Not Follow Through on the Plan (VAG), Focus only on current sales. * The Project Team Not Set-up For Success. Lone Wolves, not equipped to push through challenges (VAG!) * Enormous sunk capital and supply chains cannot be written off. * Out of touch internal skill sets and inability to hire counterculture talent.

[@miinyoo]

Absolutely. Gotta give credit where credit is due. Trying is dangerous but if you find a breakthrough, very very lucrative. Clearly liquid H2 won't be mainstream anytime soon but some of the components might find their way into production cars for similar but less extreme purposes.

[@UncleRJ]

This whole experiment is a constant "one step forward two step back", and the frustration the engineers felt must be immense. I cannot help but give props for Toyota to _still_ pursue this dream, hell even _challenge_ the world with it, despite it's many, and constant, drawbacks.

[@moabman6803]

Quite a few companies are making internal combustion hydrogen engines.

[@peraz968]

But this kind of failures is needed to get any progress at some point. You know, it is impossible to always be a winner and do succes! Sometimes have to fail too.

[@h34dshotgl0re]

Bro you just described the design process in general. Trust me the engineers in this feel pretty good! They're solving a rough problem! They're having a really good time!

[@modlife]

@@moabman6803and none of them will ever have a viable product… it takes far too much electricity to make liquid hydrogen, it burns too hot, wastes too much energy as heat, and is too dangerous to build a supply chain around.

[@MrSkeleton131]

@@h34dshotgl0re did they tell you that

[@shirolee]

I gotta say, serious respect for Toyota doing something like this.

[@traingameiacs]

what is they used electolosis to extract hydrogen from water and directly inject it into the engine, you just need to have a tank of water

[@larsw.9442]

​@@traingameiacs The energy required for electrolysis is greater than the combustion of hydrogen. Meaning you would firstly need another source of energy (let's say a battery) to produce the hydrogen but once you burn it in the engine, it would give you less energy than the battery put in.

[@traingameiacs]

@@larsw.9442 hmm yeah i suppose

[@goatsplitter]

Gotta hand it to Toyota for at least trying new things. Solving engineering problems as a test like this is important.

[@mmavcanuck]

Toyota is probably the most conservative large automotive company. They don’t “try new things” they stay in the past until the bitter end.

[@minecrafterselite1]

@@mmavcanuck then how did they develop kamikaze?

[@xaytana]

"New," while BMW did this in the mid-'00s. "Solving engineering problems," as if they really 'solved' anything here, especially 'problematic' things that can't really be solved due to basic physics. What Toyota honestly did was waste R&D funding on a pipe dream, as hydrogen, no matter what form, has downsides that will relegate it to only the highest end of racing due to the complexities and safety issues of hydrogen. And if you couldn't produce the logical thought for yourself, imagine how much worse the logistics and storage situation on the other side of the pump would be, since hydrogen is so problematic for a singular vehicle, and it's not just shipping and having a vessel buried beneath some pumps but it's also the fact that you're having to service tens of thousands of vehicles just within a regional area. What's actually 'important' is finding a solution that actually works, such as synthetic fuel, though adoption of such is probably another pipe dream because just look at high-ethanol fuels and how not-so-widely available they are after decades, or finding better battery tech with better charging infrastructure and more efficient vehicle design. How do you watch through this entire video and come to the conclusion that Toyota is doing anything more than wasting funds with a thumb up their ass? Do you not have the capability of logical thought? Can you not think for yourself? This is one of the most mindless comments I've seen on this channel. Hydrogen doesn't work, it hasn't worked in the past, it won't work in the future, nobody is solving anything, nobody is doing new things, because the idea of using hydrogen as a fuel in land vehicles does not make sense outside of hyper-specific situations where that does not apply to the bulk of what vehicles are. It's a pipe dream, the industry needs to move on, the fact that anyone is even trying to do anything with hydrogen is a joke considering you really only need a high-school education to understand why it doesn't work.

[@digitalkov]

Jeez... relax

[@mikemccormick6128]

@@mmavcanuck Exactly. That's why they were so slow to adopt 100% BEVs, Which are very obviously the future. Seems like a much better use of resources would be to invest in battery technology.

[@dannymartial7997]

So much respect for Toyota for investing crazy R&D money into projects like these.

[@JoshuaC923]

That's right

[@PbPomper]

Crazy indeed putting money into something useless.

[@MarcoReyes-sv7hz]

stockholders are crying lol

[@caravanstuff2827]

Both Japan and south Korea are investing big on a hydrogen future...this is smart for Toyota and Yamaha to develop a ice engine that will use liquid hydrogen... hydrogen fuel cells are expensive to make...far more profitable to continue with hydrogen burning ice engines!!.❤️🇺🇲🇺🇦

[@PrograError]

Well... This is gonna be a military project for sure... Both SK and Japan has a oil reliance issue and most of the rare earth/ battery comes from china, which is the current threat (SK still have DPRK, but it's like a mad dog... As long as the master hold the leash) In order not to use the bilateral US Defense treaty too much, this is basically essential... (If they could make it work, it would free many countries from oil and reliance on the West and OPAC. Tho they would have another issue: electricity and water)

[@ezpoppy55]

“It’s when you push the boundaries that you learn… and that learning often involves failure.” Yes! Exactly! I have found that both scientists and artists spend an incredible amount of time and energy creating failures. That is the nature of creative processes. It’s easy to do what is already known. It’s incredibly difficult to create something new. Scientists and artists know this, and are not discouraged by failure. Most of us, sadly, get frustrated by our failures. Yet, this is where real learning happens! No one ever asks “Why did that work?” when they succeed. There’s lots of cheering, high fives, and fist bumps. Hooray! But when something doesn’t work, that’s when artists and scientists dig in. “Why didn’t it work? What can I try next?” Very cool video, Jason!

[@davidvenegasramirez6001]

Jason is still more intelligent than a lot of engineers that I've met, even if he hasn't worked exclusively in the engineering field in a few years. Kudos man, you were the reason I began studying mechanical engineering ❤

[@h34dshotgl0re]

So you became an engineer to be a negative Nancy? Most of the issues with respect to the race have practical mechanical and process solutions. Sure hydrogen has its issues but what toyota has done for this application is clever and that should be acknowledged. Thinking outside the box to solve complex problems should be what motivates you to be an engineer!

[@wiegraf9009]

I really appreciate your fair evaluation of this technology and the effort to push the engineering, while at the same time showing the math that cuts the hype down to size. There are SO MANY people in car KZbin who are taken in by Toyota's marketing and we need this kind of stuff to keep manufacturers honest and avoid wishful thinking.

[@ericlotze7724]

I thought the Hydrogen-Solar-Hyperloop-X was the solution to all of our problems though?

[@VasyaIvanovichPupkin]

Toyota is being articularly dishonest about their development? I though they are only hying up the fact that they are working on it, not that they have a ready solution.

[@ghoulbuster1]

It's hyped because it's not boring like EVs

[@reinbeers5322]

I haven't seen any of Toyota's marketing. I just like this because it doesn't turn every car into a boring, lifeless battery car.

[@jpe1]

@@reinbeers5322I’ve been racing EV race cars for the past 9 years and I reject your criticism that they are “boring.” What _isn’t_ exciting about EV racing? Keep in mind, I’m racing in mixed fields against ICE powered cars, and often the only thing that distinguishes my car from those is that it is quieter, from a spectator point of view the racing is the same, so how can it be “boring”? If you are speaking about Formula E specifically, then perhaps there is some criticism about a lack of passing and overall timid driving that makes it less exciting, but that’s a consequence of the format, not the cars being EVs.

[@BurlyNerdGetsTheWorm]

Sometimes I wonder if these R&D teams write extensive debriefs for leadership or whether they just wait for Jason to finish and just forward the KZbin link. 😂

[@EngineeringExplained]

"Yeah boss, I mean he tells you why, but sure, we'll keep trying!" 😂

[@f4na7ic2]

They use Jason’s videos for the tl;dr part of their meeting. “Covering 50 pages of information didn’t seem feasible for this 20 minute meeting, but we have a video that covers the highlights..”

[@davidhollenshead4892]

@@EngineeringExplained You missed one issue of using H2 in an ICE, Hydrogen penetrates & bonds with the metal of the piston, head and a lesser extent the cylinder walls making them brittle and reducing the engine lifespan to less than 10k miles... Using Methane as a fuel is the best way of making an almost completely Hydrogen powered vehicle as for every molecule of CH4 burned it produces 2H20 & just one C02...

[@willrouse2351]

😂

[@ericw.1620]

@@davidhollenshead4892 Methane is also pretty common in rockets as an alternative to hydrogen for it's higher boiling point and density. The biggest problem imo is that methane itself is a very potent greenhouse gas. We'd have to be VERY careful in large scale production, storage, and usage of methane to ensure no large scale spills or leaks happen, or we'd just be undoing all the previous work.

[@scottanthony3426]

Decades ago, fellow engineers liked to say, "Hydrogen. Fuel of the future. Always has been, always will be." Still true today. And you didn't even get into how the hydrogen is produced and liquified, nor any infrastructure where people could fill up. If you think the EV charging station situation is challenging, try building a hydrogen supply and distribution chain.

[@davecom3]

Could you not use the current petrol/gas station network?

[@caravanstuff2827]

​@@davecom3yes they can..they do it in Europe and the UK and California.. battery electric fan boys are making 💩up to protect their hero Elon musk!!.❤️🇺🇲🇺🇦

[@drunkenhobo8020]

@@davecom3 Not really. You'd need new pumps and tanks, as they're wildly different. You'd also need a lot more refuelling tankers on the road due to the low volumetric density of hydrogen. And you can't pipe hydrogen easily in gas pipes as it likes to embrittle metal and leak out of pipes.

[@moabman6803]

You can fix the metal pipe problems with simple metallurgy content change.

[@groundhabit6408]

@@moabman6803thus making this transition even more expensive. Ew metals , new systems and new everything is cost that is passed on to the consumer … so far as it sits , hydrogen is $25 a kilogram in California. 5x the price of diesel and premium gas. Factor all the things needed to make a infrastructure , you will see the pride more than double to turn a profit. Who wants to pay near $50 dollars per kilogram for hydrogen ?

[@Wofinet]

Mate - I don’t comment on a lot of YT videos. But seriously what a video. So dense with complex info eloquently put. Knocking it out of the park.

[@XenonG]

Me who is into aerospace: *Starts laughing at Toyota* Might as well use metallic hydrogen.

[@Wtf_is_this_sht_]

You who is not a talented engineer:

[@minimalistic_banhaus]

Toyota's CEO doesn't believe in H2 fuel. He's just doing us a solid giving EE more topics to talk about!

[@hackfleischking5162]

It's more a culture thing. Japan is very dependent on power sources from other countrys. Hydrogen should have been a way for japan to get more independent because they have a natural hydrogen source in the sea around japan. They commited to hydrogen very hard and spend millions in that technology. With their culture it is very hard to give up on something that they comited to do. They won't stop trying

[@TML34]

So, hydrogen fuel goes in, disappointment comes out. It’s the CVT of fuels.

[@moosenugget7]

Kudos to Toyota for trying different things, going so far as to enter both their liquid hydrogen project and the other carbon-neutral fuel project into the same race. I'm very interested to see what kind of solutions automakers will come up with to keep driving fun in the face of climate change and the inevitable shift away from ordinary gasoline. Also, I'd love to see an updated video on CNF, to see if some of the issues you pointed out 2 years ago have been overcome.

[@tothelimit9992]

Porsche has been doing this for over a year

[@pontinha]

The "American translation" (7:47) from kg to rocks makes this video much more accessible and informative!

[@nthgth]

Despite that it's Australia, not America, that uses stone for weight

[@ChrisLarsson85]

About synthetic fuels, I would love a video about them including HVO which is widely used in Sweden 👍🏻

[@muppen74]

HVO is produced using normal refinery techniques, the final product is identical to fossil based diesel. I think that with synthetic fuel he means fuels made from syngas, a product that is extremely energy inefficient looking at well to wheel.

[@jomo2483]

Currently synthetic fuels are not carbon neutral. Companies just use carbon credits to produce them. So they are not the future either.

[@peraz968]

@@jomo2483 Does it matters? They allways talk abaut crudeoil and how it is going to run out. Synthetic fuels would be a succes for this problem.

[@nadahere]

😶‍🌫🤯We will soon introduce the revolutionary FAZE engine technology. The 𝔽𝕦𝕖𝕝 𝔸𝕘𝕟𝕠𝕤𝕥𝕚𝕔 ℤ𝕖𝕣𝕠 𝔼𝕞𝕚𝕤𝕤𝕚𝕠𝕟 𝔼𝕟𝕘𝕚𝕟𝕖 [𝔽.𝔸.ℤ.𝔼.] tech best solves the issues present in previous internal combustion engine designs by transforming the old paradigm into a simple, low cost, quiet, power dense, efficient, on-the-go liquid and gas fuel-flexible, ‘non-polluting’ solution for power generation of all scales and advanced transportation, construction, military, off-road vehicles including ships, aircraft, trains & robots not possible before 𝔽𝔸ℤ𝔼 delivers better than 25% ABSOLUTE/ACTUAL [not relative] fuel efficiency improvement over gasoline engines, more than 15% for Diesel engines at any operating condition - speed/load, ambient temperature or elevation, not just at one optimal testing point at STP. Real world driving cycle savings could be an additional 200% higher due to the constant MAXIMAL efficiency and torque. The simple, low cost, native/built-in, non-electric, environmentally safe, non-explosive, temperature agnostic 𝕊𝕦𝕡𝕖𝕣ℍ𝕪𝕓𝕣𝕚𝕕© feature recovers more energy than EVs and provides approx.100% fuel savings for a combined absolute vehicle fuel usage improvement of approximately 300%, thus obviating the basic need for expensive EVs & e-hybrids. 𝕚ℙ𝕠𝕨𝕖𝕣𝔹𝕠𝕠𝕤𝕥 adds >400% more torque. It’s like 4 engines in 1. 𝕚𝔼𝕗𝕗𝕚𝕔𝕚𝕖𝕟𝕔𝕪𝔹𝕠𝕠𝕤𝕥2© further improves efficiency, torque, power & other performance metrics by 10%. This is all done w/o a transmission. Additional fuel saving solutions are available. The FAZE engine perfectly follows the vehicle’s road or genset’s electrical power demand with no energy loss [no fuel waste], This unique characteristic enables dispensing with any auxiliary power units [APU] for power or refrigeration in any application. This also makes for a perfect range extender for battery electric vehicles [EV] or as a standalone EV charging unit even where is no electric grid. The fuel agnostic capability allows instantaneous use of any liquid or gaseous fuel [natural gas at home!!!] incl. biofuels and hydrogen, even if old/dirty/unprocessed like flare gas or employ the concurrent multi-fuel capability…anywhere on the globe. One engine for all locales w/o changes! Unlike EVs, this enables fast fueling anytime, anywhere…with no troublesome infrastructure disruptions or changes. EV’s are not a solution to the [FAKE]climate or mobility topics as high level of electrification globally is unrealistic [See Patrick Boyle's video "Electrify Everything?"] The technology offers smokeless, non-polluting, low odor heat and noise output without costly after-treatments, etc.,… with only the lowest CO2. It has a negative carbon footprint with hydrogen, ammonia, biofuels or gasified municipal, agricultural and/or forest waste and coal from a 2-stroke-like simplicity. These are HUGE business opportunities. We can provide these turnkey solutions The FAZE technology can be integrated into any ICE or vehicle architecture, adding some of the positive characteristics to its own. An advanced Scotch Yoke architecture slated to be incorporated in the 𝔽𝕦𝕖𝕝 𝔸𝕘𝕟𝕠𝕤𝕥𝕚𝕔 ℤ𝕖𝕣𝕠 𝔼𝕞𝕚𝕤𝕤𝕚𝕠𝕟 𝔼𝕟𝕘𝕚𝕟𝕖 [𝔽.𝔸.ℤ.𝔼.] With virtually no electronics and emissions equipment, the cost of purchase and reduced servicing frequency make this solution even more appealing.

[@liv6646]

LPG or CNG burns really cleanly also, super cheap and can be synthesized really easily using decaying organic matter. I never understood how it ever took off, with all these regulations about emissions etc.

[@Luca_____355]

Liquid phase LPG/propane injection really should be a bigger deal. It’s a shame it took off briefly but is now being under-utilised. 😢

[@LamantinoElettronico]

It did for a time, but only in Italy and a handful of other countries

[@ghoulbuster1]

Because it's not profitable to offer real solutions.

[@anthonypelchat]

I'm really curious if LPG or CNG could be a better area for long distance aviation and shipping. Hydrogen and synthetics are too expensive and will drastically hurt the companies that try to use them in that form. Hydrogen also requires a massive redesign of the entire infrastructure supporting the vessels, and not just for refueling. Batteries are great for short ranges, but struggle heavily with long distances.

[@liv6646]

@@anthonypelchatthe only main issues of LPG or CNG is lubrication on some engines and it is less energy dense compared to gasoline. Other than that, it burns cleaner, cheap to buy and synthesize also works with most gasoline engines. It's a $600 to $2000 conversion depending on the engine type/size (at least where i live)

[@zero11010]

Been on your channel for years. I really love your content, man. Thanks for the infotainment!

[@EngineeringExplained]

Thanks for watching, and mega thanks for sticking around for years, really appreciate it!

[@philnolan7193]

@@EngineeringExplained All facts, no BS and a dab of dry humour, keep up the great work

[@bcsa]

Good stuff, Jason! On this topic, it is also interesting to mention AVL's H² race engine with the water injection.

[@blablah538]

Where can I bet my savings that hydrogen cars never catch on?

[@AugustStutzman]

Why don’t they design a fuel pump piston that has a “spring loaded” seal. Basically it would just push the seal outward as it gets colder. They could use a high alloy steel to make the “spring” that would be freeze resistant.

[@SuperDirk1965]

Why not design an engine that produces energy as it's being used. They 'd just have to tell the engine that that's what's it's supposed to do.

[@bwabbel]

The best thing about synthetic fuels is that we don't even need engines to be specifically built for them

[@EngineeringExplained]

Exactly, way simpler. The whole "we could use today's engines" is mild nonsense regarding liquid hydrogen, because there are so many changes you'd need to make to the car. Technically possible? Sure. But car companies want to sell cars, not conversion kits.

[@GWAIHIRKV]

But they still pollute as bad as any hydrocarbon. I’ll happily sit in a enclosed garage with my EV fully powered. Try that with an ICE, synthetic fuel or not. . . .

[@Wiggins_Racing]

@@GWAIHIRKV how do you imagine they get the cobalt, lithium and other materials for your non-polluting EV? Certainly not through carbon-neutral means or even ethical means right?

[@danielklopp7007]

@@GWAIHIRKV Depends on what you consider "pollution". Most (all?) synthetic hydrocarbon fuels use C02 from the atmosphere as their carbon source (therefore, they are "carbon neutral"). Additionally, the net un-burned hydrocarbon emmissions are much better than fossil fuels. I'm a physicist and chemist (and an environmentalist), and after studying this issue for decades, my (educated & informed) opinion is synthetic fuels in internal combustion engine transportation is far better for the environment (and economy) than battery/electric transportation. FYI: your EV sitting in your garage simply moved the pollution problem from your garage to somewhere else on the planet! Two key scientific principles everyone should know: 1. conservation of energy (i.e. the first law of thermodynamics) and 2. conservation of mass (e.g. to total amount of carbon on the planet is a constant... has been ever since the planet was formed some 4 billions years ago); without an understand and application these basic scientific principles, any "solution" is useless.

[@ericlotze7724]

@@EngineeringExplained Also much less environmental impact ( *albeit piles of nuance and caveats*, a proper "Life Cycle Assessment" is needed, the whole "*citation needed" bit ) Using existing Storage and Distribution Infrastructure (...and the infrastructure to make/maintain that infrastructure), as well as existing Vehicles, would save a PILE of resources. No need to Remanufacture *every single vehicle in use* and build support infrastructure for all that. Also, despite being inefficient compared to Pumped Storage Hydroelectricity, Flywheels, and Flow Batteries, etc, Synthetic Fuels have a MASSIVE Storage Capability. "Power-to-X" is probably only matched in capacity by Pumped Hydro, and Compressed Gas Storage. (To an extent also Iron / Organic Flow Batteries; idk how much Vanadium we have in current capacity, or how much capacity can increase etc). To think we have entire UNDERGROUND SALT DOMES we could fill with Methanol, or DME etc! Again i'd like to reiterate this is a nuanced issue, and disrupting the status quo is needed (More Mass Transit/New Urbanism type stuff to reduce suburban sprawl car dependency, etc), BUT "drop in solutions" have major advantages. I'm a HUGE nerd on all this (if you can't tell already lol). A bit outside your channel's scope (may be better for @just have a think etc, or heck even me if i ever make a channel) , and you have done a pile of similar videos, but a video covering Power-to-X / the different Power-To-Fuels Technologies would be neat. Heck even just a video on more obscure Bio/Synfuels like Butanol and DME would be neat! I'm rambling but great video as always, and i can't agree with that end conclusion more!

[@johndoyle4723]

Thanks, very well explained. Not going to happen for most applications. I am a Chemical Engineer, my final year degree project was to design a Hydrogen liquefaction plant, the thermodynamics/ low Joule Thomson point and energy consumption were a nightmare, also remember Hydrogen likes to leak.

[@EngineeringExplained]

Yeah it's pretty wild, to create a kg of hydrogen currently (energy value of 33.3 kWh), takes about 10 kWh. Not a great return when you're starting that far down on efficiency out the gate.

[@SuperDirk1965]

@@EngineeringExplained I'd say that getting 33,3kWh of energy by investing 10kWh is pretty good. That's more than 300% increase in energy.

[@Cyrribrae]

​@@SuperDirk1965 yea but it's pretty trash when you compare it to anything else. Normal oil is 25x - 2500%. Wind is 20x. Solar is 6 to 12x. The only things worse than hydrogen are biofuels. Don't know about the specifics of synthetic fuels.. But..

[@SuperDirk1965]

@@Cyrribrae The most efficient diesels have an efficiency of 55%, that means that 45% of the energy is wasted. Don't know where you get your figures but if you could get a 2500% efficiency out of oil, you'd make Musk look like a pauper. It would actually be possible to make oil out of using it.

[@lanceareadbhar]

I like that this was secretly a synthetic fuel video.

[@SkaBob]

But the issue I read about was it costs $200 a gallon and it said with mass production it could drop to $20 a gallon. $250 to fill up a car, $550 to fill up a suv and that is assuming it could ever get to $20 / gallon. Or it costs us about $7 to do a full charge on our Ioniq 5 EV. With synthetic fuel we are still stuck with supply and demand and oil industry profits just like we have now with conventional gas.

[@MarcoReyes-sv7hz]

@@SkaBob that's why its gonna be for enthusiasts

[@evrythingis1]

@@SkaBob Its the most abundent resource in the universe, we completely control the price of everything you tool.

[@SkaBob]

@@evrythingis1 I have yet to see abundant natural synthetic fuel.

[@evrythingis1]

@SkaBob I don't think you know what the word synthetic means.

[@rogerpicklum1871]

How could anything be this silly? Cool as a concept, absolutely insane as an investment of any significant resources.

[@Bobthepragmatist]

F1 cars uses 440kWh per 100km H2 Corolla uses 538.5 kWh per 100km. Formula E uses 61.3kWh per 100km. We are using a lot of extra energy just to make a little bit of noise. I love how you do all this maths to show how inefficient hydrogen combustion is without highlighting the fact that internal combustion (even in formula 1) is just incredibly inefficient at converting energy to motion.

[@Your_Paramour]

It doesn't make sense to compare efficiencies like this for race cars, because race cars are optimised for time not distance. Furthermore, the efficiency for range is massively impact by system resistances, which in this case is drag and tyre grip, both of which are maximised in F1.

[@54mgtf22]

It makes electric cars look so simple. Hey Jason. Love your work 👍

[@KarrasBastomi]

Electric cars is simplest form of drivetrain. With modern technology and modern design, the motors and the driveshaft is the only moving parts. Everything can be designed as solid state.

[@impreza0109]

so simple it's boring.

[@moabman6803]

Evs aren't simple though. You have huge cumbersome batteries and dangerous levels of explosive current.

[@mousepotato581]

@@moabman6803What is "explosive current"?

[@moabman6803]

@mousepotato581 Explosive current is lots of amps and lots of volts. The higher the volts and amps, the more danger.

[@EinChris75]

Racing was always disconnected from reality. But one could argue, that technology advancements could "trickle down" to manufacturing models. But with this system... it's hardly imaginable.

[@Technosplosion]

Most vehicle technology actually started in racing. It is the best way to demonstrate that a new technology can shake up the game and perform under stressful conditions. It likely just feels pointless because racing is not as prevalent as it was back in the day. If someone made an F1 car that ran on hydrogen and performed the same or better than their gas counter parts, then people would rightfully be excited. Hydrogen allows us to keep all the things we love about combustion while also being 0 emissions.

[@EinChris75]

@@Technosplosion did you even watch that video? There is a difference between engineering and physics. Physics are the hard limit. And as such temperature and energy density are fixed properties of hydrogen.

[@dianapennepacker6854]

​@@TechnosplosionWhat is the point of a hydrogen vehicle that an EV can't do? Batteries are only getting better, using less of the rarer resources, charge faster, and hold more charge! Tons of break through have already happened in the labs. They just need to be brought up to scale or get manufacturing worked out. That doesn't include the other benefits of EVs over hydrogen which is acceleration. Then you have motors which are also getting significantly better like Koenigseggs Dark Matter which is just one of the most ridiculous motors out there.

[@Technosplosion]

The benefits to hydrogen are due to its simplicity and compatibility with already existing power trains. Why completely redesign a car from the ground up when you could just modify the fueling system to work with hydrogen? All those "laboratory advancements" are not real until they actually come out of the lab. The number of articles and scientific journals I've seen over a decade that said something like "breakthrough in "x" that will change "y" completely" that ended up never becoming reality is honestly insane to me. There's always a "new battery" every year or a "room temperature superconductor." What hasn't been improved upon because it just doesn't need to be is hydrogen. It stores long-term better than batteries, external conditions don't affect hydrogen as much as batteries, and hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe with 70% of the planet's surface being water, which is 66% hydrogen. Do you still want EV performance? No problem, fuel cells. Hydrogen is the future, especially with the shockingly quiet push for fusion.

[@EinChris75]

@@Technosplosion you certainly should watch Jasons video about that hydrogen fueled BMW. And then read your statements you made in this comment. And you certainly should update your statement about batteries as well. The main reason why your cellphone is as small as it is, comes from the advancements in battery technology. On the other hand, there is no practical method of storing hydrogen (without losing lots of it or wasting lots of energy). Just being able to burn it, is just a tiny tiny fraction of the challenge in using it. Oh and an other thing... "surface" % of the planet and 66% Hydrogen is quite a useless number. Surfaces have no volume (because they are a surface, you know, not a volume). And although it is correct, that 66% of the atoms in water are hydrogen, the mass (and volume) comes from the O part in H2O. Jason also made a nice video about energy density of Hydrogen vs. "traditional" fuel. And the best Hydrogen engine won't compensate for bad efficiency a typical ICE has (somewhere between 15-35%, compared to the >80% of an electrical engine). In short. H2 is not a viable solution for cars. I never will be.

[@aldimore]

Yay a win for those that love as many moving parts in a car as possible.

[@vipermoon_]

If I decide to watch your videos, it means I have to think. But man am I glad pretty much every time because I learn so much!

[@aecgem]

Mad respect for just building this engine/fuel setup in the first place, honestly, even if it isnt a practical solution for energy density. Moreover, the build-out of synthetic fuel plants sounds like it could be incredibly promising. Since the produced fuels would require carbon to begin with, sequestering even a small ~1% margin of the captured C or CO2 used to create the desired synthetic fuel would be a reliable and efficient solution for vehicle fuel supply production while having a net-negative carbon impact.

[@mathiasmang848]

If you want discuss the future of ICE further, you should make a video about ammonia as a fuel. There is a ton of research going into this topic at the moment. Its easily storeable, can be produced with electricity and the emissions are Nitrogen and Water. Its mainly thought for marine applications and heavy machinery, but Toyota and GAC have released an Ammonia engine for passenger cars recently. Definately another interesting topic to look at

[@marshallb5210]

Ammonia is too toxic for a civilian vehicle

[@aikidoshi007]

In the end - once you own an electric vehicle - you reap the benefits of it needing no maintenence and no moving parts to speak of. If you convert a petrol engine to run on something else you still have so many moving parts that you'll have your hand in your pocket for the life of the vehicle, replacing moving parts. In fact the biggest expense with my Ford V8 Falcon was brake pads and disks, and regenerative braking in my Tesla put an end to that expense. In 12 months my brake pads and rotors are as new. I haven't spent a cent on anything except charging, and that only because I live in a rental house and don't have a solar roof.

[@LittleSpot]

and you can generate your own power. and it is more efficient. and hydrogen isn't growing on trees :).

[@jijokoshyksjijo3989]

very happy for you.. but please let others also have fun in their own way..😊

[@aikidoshi007]

@@jijokoshyksjijo3989 I'm a petrol head myself and loved my big V8 Falcon while I had it. If people want to continue that tradition, good on them.

[@helicocktor]

I love internal combustion, but those are great points. The world's changing. Out with the old, in with the new. It's sad but developments in battery tech now are like the early latter half of the 20th century with IC engines in progress. With the added benefit of batteries having many other applications compared to H2/syngas engines. The ROI for innovations in battery tech mean there's not much sense to R&D H2/syngas at the same scale. Maybe for racing applications, but once us dinosaurs die out, later generations won't carry the same sentiment for ICE as they never knew the golden age of internal combustion.

[@sking2173]

⁠@@helicocktor - These later generations also seem to embrace homosexuality and transgenderism more than we oldsters. That sure as hell doesn’t mean I want to start going to gay bars …

[@Fee.1]

If you just made a second video to burst my bubble about hydrogen combustion I will never forgive you

[@toyotaprius79]

Seeethe

[@EngineeringExplained]

This channel is dedicated to the sustainable transition from happiness to suffering.

[@Fee.1]

@@EngineeringExplained it’s too potent though 😭😭

[@shresthsonkar9207]

cope

[@Fee.1]

@@shresthsonkar9207 cope that your balls ain’t dropped yet

[@brrrake]

Every time I watch one of your videos I am so impressed by how much information you can fit in the video while making it so concise. So that hydrogen F1 car... 8m wheelbase Oscar Mayer Weiner car? 🤣

[@zoransarin5411]

Wow...extraordinary video with great explanations of the issues involved and the limitations. Much appreciated

[@psychic_wolf]

Can we talk about the GR86? I'd love to hear about how carbon-capture tech is packaged in a car and its advantages and disadvantages. Synthetic fuel really seems like our only hope for saving the ICE.

[@hackfleischking5162]

Yeah it realy is but it will be way to expensive for normal people

[@terradrive]

iinm carbon capture isn't packaged in the car, it's done on the synthetic fuel production. Capturing and using the carbon from carbon dioxide in the air, so when the fuel is burnt and releasing carbon dioxide it is still net zero carbon (in reality almost net zero since you do burn some minuscule amount of engine oils)

[@hackfleischking5162]

@@terradrive yes but carbon capture from the air is very ineffective. Most synthetic fuel is made by capturing CO2 in factories

[@terradrive]

@@hackfleischking5162 whatever places they are capturing the carbon, my point is it's not packaged in the car

[@neutrino78x]

"Synthetic fuel really seems like our only hope for saving the ICE." That still puts out CO2. You really want either batteries or H2. 🙂 Only time we would settle for green synthetic fuel (carbon neutral) is for aircraft. There's no reason not to just go to electric for SUV and smaller. You already have electric going into your house. 🙂

[@jkliao6486]

I think it boils down to the same problems we had last time with the hydrogen V8 engine, like storage.

[@hackfleischking5162]

Yeah and the problem that the fuel pump doesn't last

[@markcoopers1930]

Can a quick-change system for the entire hydrogen tank be used during the race, or does the tank require significantly more bracing than that would allow?

[@phelanwolf6747]

Why would you want that? Refuelling the tank is not the primary issue, the fuel is.

[@chaselandry2962]

Tire changes used to be an hours long task. Racing has a 4 tire pit stop at under 2 seconds now. They will find a way.

[@EngineeringExplained]

Toyota says they've gotten fill time down to one minute, so there'd be no reason to swap the tank.

[@HCkev]

The issue is about the fuel pump that don't last

[@mysticknight487]

Ford made switching brakes on the GT40 fast cause that was it's weakness. I'm sure someone could figure out how to swap the whole tank with a new pump and transfer the fuel to speed up pump changes. That said there still would be more issues, only good thing is if F1 picked it up there'd be 100s of millions going into figuring it out each year

[@ELXABER]

I 100% agree. I don't know why anyone is even talking about anything other than synthetic fuel unless their name is Tesla

[@mattrobinson5254]

Racing programs are marketing tools, if companies race with batteries they’ll be closer to road cars and there’s an advantage to that. There’s also an advantage for Toyota to pretend hydrogen wasn’t a silly idea to bet on.

[@ELXABER]

@@mattrobinson5254 You can’t race EVs on a track. They cause fires and melt the tracks, so they banned them. EV is a dead revolution and will never be more than an option unless they manage wireless energy. The energy density for hydrogen and its complications are well known. Japan went that route to keep from being reliant on China and it was a bad idea from the start because of known issues.

[@georgeford6056]

You can synthesize butane, butane carries 12% more energy than propane, butane burns very clean (NOX emissions so low they probably wouldn't need EGR or a catalytic converter) and it liquefies at room temperature at a very low pressure (which is why it is used in cigarette lighters), eliminating the need for very heavy tanks to contain it.

[@nthgth]

Sounds great, maybe it burns too slowly.

[@MLHunt]

Seems like a lot of challenges have to be overcome to make this a viable, competitive technology. But I hope they can do it as it would be a significant addition to the tools available to adjust fossil fuel use. Good luck Toyota, I hope you're not chasing down a blind alley.

[@RobertHancock1]

Narrator: They were, in fact, chasing down a blind alley with the entire pursuit of hydrogen power.

[@reinbeers5322]

@@RobertHancock1 Too early to tell. Ya'll have no spirit calling a race before it even got started.

[@mantas8443]

One thing You left out about storing hydrogen is its' size. I'm talking about molecular size. The hydrogen atom is the smallest there is. Okay, they're usually sitting in H2 molecules, but they're still small enough to be able to slip through the gaps between atoms of some other materials atomic lattice. Like water soaks through paper. Surely that leakage is very small and gas storage is probably more prone to it (as it has higher pressure and hydrogen is in gas state) than liquid, but that is still a thing. And it *totally* doesn't help pump leakage.

[@Cyrribrae]

It's actually quite high. Much higher than storing hydrocarbons. One of many factors that makes above ground storage economically unviable. But it's also very reactive chemically and even biologically. Some storage solutions experience over 40% loss.. It's wild.

[@schuttle89]

Great video Jason, also battery packs having such high surface area is good for cooling (more heat transfer area). It's almost like physics prefers battery cars over hydrogen.

[@PrograError]

But also a bomb if not cooled proper... Which makes rescue in crash harder in future...

[@deansmits006]

​@@PrograErrorYes... kinda. Not a bomb, but more like a controlled intense burn. Not going to explode and create a 10 meter crater. More like a gas fire but much harder to put out. Also consider LFP batteries are a much safer chemistry, and they are becoming the battery chemistry of choice.

[@jaimeduncan6167]

@@PrograError You may remember when it was common for Cell Phones to overheat. Gas cars "explode" all the time by the way, but they are easier to put off. Combustion technology has more than 100 years of continuous super capital intensive and highly regulated safety and performance R&D the fact that Electric cars are far better in a bunch of areas and competitive in many others (the GM EV can even tow) is an unexpected fantastic result. If they can double the energy density gas cars (not bit trucks) will become obsolete.

[@DanBurgaud]

Cheers Cheers! ICE is not losing to EV. Now build 1,000,000 Hydrogen cars already.

[@Wiibiplay]

"We'll never see large scale adoption in liquid hydrogen combustion engines in passenger cars" Fine, I'll prove you wrong myself! You've made it my life mission to prove you wrong.

[@Mabeylater293]

As Henry Ford would say, this is Toyota’s “faster horse”. Meanwhile on my move from toyota to Tesla…………

[@erkinalp]

Faster, bigger horses 😅

[@Moh_Yasin_]

To solve the fuel pump problem is to eliminate the fuel pump (Literally). Because when the hydrogen expands the pressure will continuously build up. This process makes the fuel tank act as a fuel pump. If toyota is seeing it. I would recommend to make the tank cylindrical and somewhat high pressurized. Not as high as the hydrogen gas tank. This makes the liquid point of the hydrogen go above the standard liquid temperature. Remove the vapourizer and direct the gas into the turbo. This makes the hydrogen turn into gas and more over the air compresses in the inlet giving you more power. To control the pressure. Just adjust the temperature inside the fuel tank and using valves. If you want the fuel pump to be present then create the piston using bismoth metal alloy. For more explanation reply me

[@zteaxon7787]

It is all just a weird experiment unless there exists any sensible way to apply this to passenger cars. Either you get a very efficient battery able to cool the tank for months. And venting it off safely when the battery is empty. Or we find a way to stabilize H² gas to store it and easily use it for a combustion engine. Ideally we find some great catalyst to split hydrogen from water without needing huge energy. The space problem for the tank is solved easily by redesigning cars. Either a big front end, back end or front and back with no boot. Perhaps in the middle with tank as seperator between driver and rear passenger. To me hydrogen fuel cells seem to make more sense than combustion. Apparently they are 60% efficient compared to 25% for the combustion engine.

[@johnbenoy7532]

@@zteaxon7787 venting hydrogen into a closed off garage (suppose the car is parked inside one) is literally going to blow up the house

[@Bryan46162]

One other factor that makes liquid hydrogen so difficult to manage is that it has a REVERSE JOULE THOMSON EFFECT when going from liquid back to gas. This means that as it expands... IT GETS HOTTER! This heat then begins to boil the remaining liquid hydrogen which then also begins to force its expansion heat into the system leading to more/faster boil off and a vicious cycle is underway....

[@sevenmileshome]

As someone who hypes up hydrogen fuel over EV, this video helped put reality back into place. I will do more research on synthetic fuels now, because EV and hydrogen dont seem to be the answer at this time. Thank you.

[@o00scorpion00o]

I was thinking in my head all the time "Synthetic fuel" haha, While synthetic might not be efficient they have discovered a way to extract Co2 and Hydrogen from sea water that is much more efficient that extraction from the air, 2 key ingredients in synthetics are Co2 and Hydrogen. I drove BEV for 10 years and now back in a petrol manual car with 6 speed gearbox, absolutely love it and no hanging around wasting time at charge points on long trips and love the sound of the engine and changing gears. I'd love to be able to fill it up with synthetic fuel.

[@mikecoppola6098]

Scientists who have worked in the development of H as a fuel came to the conclusion decades ago that it just does not work as a fuel. It is simply a case of physics and chemistry. It takes a lot of energy to separate hydrogen from other elements, be it oxygen, in H2O or C in CH4, methane. Whether the greenhouse gas producing steam- methane method or the electrolysis method, it requires lots of energy. The so called green method, electrolysis may not be as green as they say as it uses lots of energy. In order to make the electrolysis process commercially viable you have to use very expensive catalysts and highly pure water. The pure water is made either by distillation or osmosis through a membrane, both require lots of energy. The electrolysis itself requires lots of energy. If you use fossil generated energy for these processes you produce lots of GHG'S. If you use green energy sources, wind, solar, hydro, you prevent those from replacing fossil fuel generation so indirectly you are making GHG'S. It does not end there. This very small molecule requires more energy to compress it, cool it and move it through a special type of piping. If you mix it with petroleum fuels and combust it it will wear out the engine very fast and only reduce the GHG emissions a tiny amount. If you use it to produce electricity in a fuel cell you will lose 65% of its energy making the electricity in the fuel cell. You will never see any significant number of trains, planes or automobiles using hydrogen as a fuel because battery electric propulsion is so much more energy efficient and simply cheaper.

[@laddy3916]

Wow amazing take, it makes sense. All these synthetic fuels and battery cars all require energy to produce usually from burning oil. All these emissions the governments are pushing are all about control if they truly cared they’d stop flying their private jets everywhere

[@logitech4873]

@@laddy3916 tf are you on about

[@purpleguy3000]

Feels a lot like the jet car. Somehow being miles ahead and miles behind other solutions.

[@levoGAMES]

Electric really seems to be the simplest and most practical option. But we can always learn a lot from trying these things out. That's how we progress.

[@poochyenarulez]

I agree. Hydrogen has been a failure but it was a good effort and someone needed to try it

[@h34dshotgl0re]

It's practical until you consider the materials that go into it and where they come from. A solution that isn't all Eggs in one basket is far superior!

[@jaimeduncan6167]

Yeah as long as we are not pursuing zero emissions for all Transport forms.

[@johnbenoy7532]

@@h34dshotgl0re even then, its still only a bit worse then making an ICE car. Lithium can be infinitely recycled and as of now, 95% of all electric car batteries are recycled with tesla using more than 70% of recycled Lithium in their batteries.

[@jeffdejeanne1799]

Another informative video!

Maybe the issue is that we are focusing on making cars "green" instead of figuring out how to extract that carbon from the atmosphere and turn int back into gasoline efficiently so we can re-cycle it

[@MC---]

I am always impressed by your explanations and that I never seen a jump cut and it always appears to be 1 take. It would be really interesting to see a video on what you think would be the best options to transform each transportation sector into more efficient and carbon neurtal / emmision free.

[@onetrickhorse]

My view: Cars: Batteries. Trucks/buses: Battery and fuel cell hybrid. Trains: electric. Ships: Bioethanol or biomethanol. Aircraft: biofuels at first, liquid hydrogen eventually.

[@sjsomething4936]

Great suggestion!

[@Takyodor2]

@@onetrickhorse I think aircraft will have to settle for synthetic fuels, storing hydrogen is likely even more challenging in the air...

[@onetrickhorse]

@@Takyodor2 yes, certainly in the short-to-medium term, aircraft have no other option but to use synthetic fuels, bio kerosene/SAF. The problem is the scale up challenge of biofuels and feedstock availability. As climate change progresses, the world will need to get used to less arable land, so algaes or other means will need to be adopted, and bio fuels aren't net zero solutions, in order to be net zero, a number of other industries need to decarbonise too, such as nitrate production, agriculture, irrigation, processing, and distribution to name some of the big hitters. As it stands, biofuels can be approx. 30-90% reduced carbon depending on type. For the whole aviation industry to use biofuels, production needs to scale up by orders of magnitude, and when you consider that the aviation industry will have competition for feedstocks from the automotive industry, shipping industries, it'll push prices higher than is economically viable for aircraft. There is the option of 'power to liquid' fuels, so direct air carbon capture, electrolysis, and then combining in the Fischer-Tropsch process to make aviation fuel, but the cost is much higher than biofuels, and again it requires significant renewable energy to do. You rightly mentioned storage, which is a major challenge for hydrogen. Hydrogen is very energy dense, but very poor volumetrically, so to store the same quantity of energy as kerosene, you need about 4 times the volume of hydrogen assuming liquid storage, however since it is far lighter, even when you consider the weight of the tanks, the aircraft max take-off weight would reduce substantially, especially in the case of larger aircraft where the fuel mass fraction is large. It isn't a showstopper, but certainly a significant challenge. One of my favorite facts about hydrogen is that you can store about 1.6 times more hydrogen in a litre of kerosene than you can in a litre of pure liquid hydrogen. Carbon is a really good way of efficiently storing hydrogen. Ultimately, cost will determine what happens. At the moment, kerosene is about $0.54 per litre in the USA for airlines. Biofuels stand at about double that at the moment, so $1.10 or so. Hydrogen cost per equivalent unit energy, so the same energy content per litre of kerosene equivalent, stands at about $0.82, with liquid hydrogen costing about $1.28. Power to liquid kerosene is about $3.00 per litre at the moment, and the direction of travel for each is that kerosene is increasing, biofuels are increasing, hydrogen and power to liquid are decreasing in cost. So as time passes by, hydrogen will look more attractive, and will always be cheaper than power to liquid fuels since you need hydrogen to make it.

[@Takyodor2]

@onetrickhorse I guess we will have to wait and see if airplane designers are able to cram that hydrogen storage into new designs (at reasonable cost), or if it becomes cheap enough to produce more energy dense fuels from the hydrogen and keep the current plane designs...

[@tristanyseult]

I would be interested to see what they could make of Ammonia, more stable storage at higher temps/pressures and denser Hydrogen than hydrogen itself.

[@doomslayer4276]

Smelllll.......

[@johnbenoy7532]

Toxicity. Ammonia in the concentration needed is far to toxic for use in public vehicles, and that's not considering its mass transport and long term storage. Also ammonia fuels produce notoriously bad emissions so their use in urban environments won't be great.

[@MBergyman]

Interesting idea. Use the venting H2 to run a fuel cell to power a refrigeration system to keep the tank cold.

[@tomasjedno36]

When u make refrigeration system to keep the tank cold it wont boil and so its got no power to generate energy ergo refrigeration system doesnt work... even if u try to do it with some cycles of hi-lo temps inside tank u will eventualy run out of H2 at the end....

[@MBergyman]

@tomasjedno36 ​of course it will eventually run out. Neither you nor I have done the math on a system like this. My guess is that it would be better to use the vented H2 for some sort of good purpose rather than venting it, but it's possible the tank is insulated well enough that the energy that would go into refrigeration process could be more than the power lost due to just venting out and catalyzing the fuel. Not to mention, if you are at home, you just plug the car in and a refrigeration cycle can run without having to waste the stored fuel at all. It wouldn't eventually run out in this case.

[@cyrusgaming943]

I love that you talk about synthetic fuels! I geniuenely think that this will be a major part of what powers future automobiles since it doesn't require rare minerals (sans hybridization) and removes CO2 emissions from the atmosphere reducing the environmental burden placed on manufacturing. Hybrid cars are getting crazy efficient nowadays and they are cheaper to build than BEV's or FCEV's. Granted synth-fuel has its own issues however, I think they are easier to solve and are much less dependant on a global trade economy, which COVID-19 showed us just how fragile it is.

[@erictate8986]

@Cyrusgam943 Facts very good points that you are making !! I also was Thinking the Similar thing by working on the gas and hybrid vehicles, plus more fine tuning, with the alternate fuels with better burning Process and efficiency , is the way to go, because we can not just depend EV'S only!! Plus on a global scale electric cars and trucks Create another very Toxic environment with all of their batteries with is not that smart of thinking !!!!

[@EG-yo2er]

LH2 tankers don't vent as they drive around. They are pressure vessels as well and the pressure builds up. The BOG can be recondensed at the liquefier/offload facility.

[@matthewspaccarelli5007]

Jason, can you solve the pump problem by using a small heater in the fuel tank to boil off what you need? Like a steam locomotive does. Make the tank also the pressure vessel, but just enough pressure for the injectors. So you can make it pumpless.

[@Saoldric]

was thinking the same thing.

[@cameronswan8646]

It could create too much excess pressure. Like filling a propane tank past 85-90% You'd need to vent the excess because this method probably wouldn't be super accurate and that can be dangerous.

[@MarcinArmata]

Witam Serdecznie Bardzo ciekawy materiał. Jest zauważalne iż przed Toyotą jest jeszcze wiele do zarobienia w powyższym temacie na dwóch płaszczyznach: 1-opracowania standardu magazynowania wodoru. 2- poprawienie parametrów pracy silnika na wodorze. Moim zdaniem aby ratować w obecnym czasie reputację silników spalinowych, należało by wrócić do starych lecz nie wiedząc dla czego zapominanych technologii wtrysku wody wraz z ładunkiem do cylindra silnika. Odsyłam zainteresowanych w temacie do pogłębienia wiedzy.

[@SonsOfLorgar]

Since they knew the fuel pump would have to be replaced multiple times during the race, why didn't they design the pump assembly as an easily accessible 5min quick change module?

[@EngineeringExplained]

Because it is unfortunately not a simple process. It's inside the hydrogen tank, which requires draining the remaining hydrogen, then nitrogen fill, then replacing the pump, then removing the nitrogen, then gaseous hydrogen fill, then liquid fill.

[@dapper_gent]

That's what she said!!!😂

[@kythanh5555]

Beautiful... Toyota is going strong. Thanks TOYOTA.

[@ezpoppy55]

Your videos are AWESOME. Hydrogen seems an impractical fuel source for passenger vehicles, as you state. But perhaps it MAY work for large cargo transport vehicles (ships, rail, air). Vehicles that are far less restricted by size and weight than a family vehicle. One of the reasons that I wouldn’t use it for a passenger vehicle is I’d be forced to go to a hydrogen station (i.e., gas station) to refuel. I’d have to lay a surcharge to the vendor gif providing the fuel to cover costs of operating the station and for the vendor to make a profit. One of the main reasons we got our two EVs (Model 3 SR+ and VW ID.4) 2 years ago is so we would not be forced to go to a gas station ever again. And, we have the option of installing solar panels on our home’s roof, so we wouldn’t need to pay the utility company for the electricity we’d create. True Energy independence. But your videos are fascinating and I applaud them and you!

[@tothelimit9992]

You realise once everyone has EVs they will start charging you too right?

[@olishant]

Toyota will do literally anything other than investing in BEV research and development...

[@the9496]

BEV?

[@moonman103]

​@@the9496battery electric vehicle

[@miatagod80]

Bev?

[@olishant]

@@miatagod80 Battery Electric Vehicle

[@olishant]

@@the9496 Battery Electric Vehicle

[@tipoomaster]

I'd love to see your style of comparison on ceramic vs. semi metallic vs. organic brake pads

[@Phantom-mk4kp]

A lot of people on mainstream media saying hydrogen is the answer, don't realise it has to be produced with electricity. And a hydrogen combustion engine is still likely to be no better than 40% efficient, so will never compete with a battery

[@buysncharge]

There are geological reserves of hydrogen.

[@reinbeers5322]

Unlike electricity, hydrogen tanks don't really degrade that much.

[@buysncharge]

@reinbeers5322 they're a pressure vessel with a life span tho. It would been recertification and stuff.

[@ChucksSEADnDEAD]

​@@reinbeers5322 Hydrogen likes to slip into metal causing embrittlement and pressurization cycles would lead to fatigue.

[@evil17]

@@ChucksSEADnDEADembrittlement would occur on all metallic parts between tank and injectors.

[@paddeemusio]

This is exactly what I want to hear and see

[@bradweinberger6907]

Toyota just won't let their hydrogen fever dream die

[@jeffcranmer5374]

It will die when the company fails, if it continues to fail to embrace fulll EVs

[@clandon9624]

@@jeffcranmer5374ok good to know it won’t die lol

[@tothelimit9992]

@@jeffcranmer5374it wont. Cus porsche started this over a year ago. Before toyota did

[@jeffcranmer5374]

@@tothelimit9992 except Porsche are full in with EVs. Their most powerful production car is now an EV. They've never sold a hydrogen car, and never will.

[@seushimarejikaze1337]

you dont know if you dont try.

[@Heinry-11]

I heard that Toyata is working with Panasonic on something called "Solid State Battery". Could you possibly consider creating an episode about it? I'm curious to know whether these batteries could potentially make EVs lighter.

[@grantbuttenshaw]

They have been talking about that for 10 years or more.

[@grantbuttenshaw]

They have been talking about that for 10 years or more.

[@anthonypelchat]

Many companies are working on Solid State batteries. Toyota as been perpetually 5 years for the last 10 years with it. One day we will see it. But who knows how long until it is ready to a point of mass production. And even then there will be a while before it can come down to a decent cost and performance capability.

[@Marco-xz7rf]

Can't you use the leaking H2 in the fuelcell and using the generated electricity to cool the tank? it wouldn't help a lot, but at least a little bit. Or maybe charge a battery or at least use it for something.

[@stellabckw2033]

huh, nice thinking

[@SCREAMILLUSION]

I mean- it'd be cool if they somehow worked maybe ev regenerative braking into helping cool the tank, like ev motors in each wheels etc and this? I wonder if someone smarter could make this work? so older cars could be retro fitted with both

[@Marco-xz7rf]

@@SCREAMILLUSION probably directly using the electricity to charge a batterie is mor eefficient, but i don't know. To be honest, i feeld like this whole thing is a scam. Basically every car is a hybrid. You have an electric motor, that spins your engine, so that it can start. So if you simply bef that up a little bit and have a little bit more battery power, EVERY CAR could have regen braking. it brobably wouldn't even be complicated or that much more expensive, because these are parts every car needs to have anyway, sooo why isn't every car and mini hybrid anyway? 😅

[@johnbenoy7532]

The issue is, the whole additional fuel cell takes up even more space and room in a vehicle with is already limited in that demand. The energy gained is simply not worth the additional weight

[@Marco-xz7rf]

@@johnbenoy7532 yeah sure, hydrogen simply is to hard to store and even then takes away a lot of space. But if they manage to find a better way to store it, it could be quite useful. I mean it is the way nature produces power in most animals.

[@SanePerson1]

Toyota has made great strides in developing an engine that will work well on the coldest areas of Pluto.

[@Dermisc]

Damn... liquid hydrogen, combustion... anyone else getting space shuttle vibes? Imagine if the pressure relief mechanism fails. Your fuel tank just became a timed bomb.

[@jonathanaminiel1823]

Not sure if you have heard of Mike copeland from Arrington performance. They apparently have been successful with a gas hydrogen LS in their truck and hydrogen Coyote in their falcon. I think they approached hydrogen combustion differently and worth checking them out

[@SkaBob]

The problem I've seen with synthetic fuel is it currently costs $200 a gallon, it said with mass production the cost could drop to $20 a gallon. $250 to fill a Camry, $500 to fill an F150, or use that same energy used in producing this fuel to just charge an EV for around $8 for a car to $25 for Hummer EV. Plus with synthetic fuel we are back to the whole supply and demand problems we have with gas.. Refinery goes down and prices go up, oil companies want more profit prices go up, demand goes up prices go up.

[@shresthsonkar9207]

Carbon capture tech is the bottleneck right now, in efuel production. Unfortunately, due to this, you need to supply more electricity than the world produces right now, to the carbon capture units to match current oil demand. No way it can work even if you could somehow conjure up that much renewable power. Even then, per dollar invested into solar or wind will charge way more EVs directly than fill gas cars with eFuel ie for a given amount of installed capacity of renewable sources, you can drive an EV for longer than a gas car using e fuels made using that clean energy

[@brunnorpdias]

What if you allow the pressure to increase in the tank as hydrogen evaporates until the pressure is high enough that the pump is no longer needed?

[@EngineeringExplained]

I was thinking the same, but after running the numbers you wouldn't have sufficient flow. You'd need a lot of fuel to evaporate very quickly! (You're using a ~150 liter tank in 30 minutes).

[@Simon-hc9mi]

Or pump air into the tank to increase the pressure

[@MarkRose1337]

​@@Simon-hc9mi You'd still have the leaky pump problem then. But you could use a resistive heating element.

[@igornoga5362]

@@EngineeringExplained The flow rate can be increased by heating the tank (either by resistive heating or a heat exchanger). The problem is that the whole tank has to be pressurized to whatever the pump output pressure was. This makes it much heavier and potentialy explosive.

[@wiegraf9009]

That would introduce fuel contamination @@Simon-hc9mi

[@mittelwelle_531_khz]

16:45 ImO, of all the difficulties discusded here, dumping out absolutely pure water from your garage is the smallest problem by far. Your local plumber will be happy to come up with a cost effective solution.😊

[@tothelimit9992]

Lets not forget Porsche already did this in the 2021 Porsche mobil 1 super cup. For the whole season

[@DIYtechie]

And just like that EE (mercy)killed the liquid hydrogen car using simple math and data. No problem IMO, but this video is just very convincing (in addition to being interesting).

[@UnkleSi]

Omg they are determined to bankrupt themselves in the face of all logic. Truly incredible. RIP toyota

[@Yoshimatsu414]

I feel like these issues that your are mentioning will get figured out with time and some investment hopefully by others than just Toyota. Like you mentioned, BMW did this and I think also Aston Martin had a Vantage they were going to race or were racing, so I feel like they could put their brains together on this. I feel personally this technology or efuel would be the way to go other than EV for the masses if we want to get emissions down.

[@hackfleischking5162]

They all quited for good reasons. There are problems that couldn't be solved in decades and as these technologies are stuck at some point EVs are catching up again. They are much easyer to make and they get their problems solved

[@tankeater]

FOR SHRINKING ISSUES... Different thicknesses such as 1/2in, wont shrink as much as say the same material at 1/4in.

[@forbiddenera]

2:17 the throttle only controls how much air goes in the engine. The injectors and computer control how much fuel goes in the engine.

[@michaelpoblete1415]

Toyota's effort is sounding like trying to save steam powered cars by using diesel fuel. Difference now it's a hydrogen 'bomb' on wheels. On the topic of rare minerals, it has been solved by using iron phosphate (LFP) on majority of standard range EVs eliminating need for cobalt and nickel and rare earth magnets is being eliminated by using nitron (nitrogen iron) magnets on upcoming tesla models

[@jpdemer5]

The amount of energy required just to liquefy the hydrogen make this concept a non-starter. Never mind that making hydrogen generates CO2 ... you're just separating the CO2 production from the vehicle's operation, much as you do with an EV that relies on power generated from burning fossil fuels.

[@JakeTran141]

I mean looking at an energy saving standpoint combustion engines make absolutely no sense for combustion is one of the worst ways of converting energy to kinetic energy. On the economic standpoint it also makes no sense as there is no reliable means of getting Hydrogen for consumption on the ever-increasing demand for transportation. The only good side to this is the emissions, given that the Hydrogen is clean (made from renewable sources), similar situation to electricity, where some countries do not have the infrastructure required to cleanly produce electricity, leading straight back to hybrid vehicles, which means emissions.

[@josephkolodziejski6882]

It's for racing

[@JakeTran141]

Yeah this is just a side tangent I made before watching the video

[@phelanwolf6747]

@@josephkolodziejski6882yeah but for racing they can also just use fully synthetic fuel.

[@wiegraf9009]

Bingo @@phelanwolf6747

[@RocketRaspeed]

Its amazing the trouble we create for ourselves when we pretend CO2 is a hazardous death gas and not the main building block of all life on Earth. We already have near perfect fuels that create mostly plant food when used in our modern clean burning engines.

[@BamaTidefan1967]

Especially at a whopping 0.03% of the Earths atmosphere. That is less than 1/10th of one percent. If you want an EV please buy one but leave the rest of us alone!

[@stinkfinger1942]

If we're making our own/paying a fair price the mpg doesn't really matter. I'd have no issue filling up every 50-60km, the pro

[@cranegantry868]

That was a big waste of time.

[@JoJoJoker]

Biofuel is another option to save combustion. Presenting EVs as the only alternative to gasoline shows a lack of seriousness on behalf of those who are concerned about pollution.

[@wiegraf9009]

No one is presenting EVs as the only alternative, it's just that biofuels are only a SERIOUS alternative in niche cases (motorsports, aviation, etc.).

[@seogabonotjah6555]

thats true already included on synthfuel solution i guess, e fuel downsides is from the hydrogen manufacturer that super highly cost *in currents std

[@angrygromit93]

is the question can, or should?

[@maximeruffel2061]

I just want to correct a statement in the video "H2 Internal combustion engine does not make NOx" : this is not true. H2 ICE makes much more NOx than diesels ICEs if running at stoichiometric lambda. Second, if and H2 ICE runs at lambda one, the cylinder pressure will be way too high. That's why H2 ICEs needs huge turbos to run very lean.

[@AJTalks]

The pumping problem seems like a good application for Tesla's bladeless turbine. Nikola Tesla himself claimed to liquify the atmospheric oxygen and nitrogen by rotating large units at high speeds, so it can take the cold.

[@xPorkchops007x]

Diesel plug in hybrid is the solution no one wants to hear

[@sam512]

If you consider a slightly less emitting car ‘the solution’ then yeah, nobody wants to hear it

[@toyotaprius79]

And yknow. After so many years of the Prius and other limited choice Toyota hybrids, and it has taken almost two decades for Ford to make a hybrid Maverick after their Escape hybrid ... Why hasn't Toyota made a hybrid duty vehicle? It proves to anyone paying attention that they're not interested in solutions.

[@RobertHancock1]

The emissions problems with diesels are not solved by making them a hybrid. If anything they get worse as your engine is now starting and stopping and not running at optimal temperatures much of the time.

[@erkinalp]

​@@RobertHancock1In a series hybrid, you can make them run at high speeds most of the time.