Toyota's Says They Just Destroyed EVs - Hydrogen Combustion Engines

[@blahblahboii]

One reason I've heard why Japan is extremely reluctant to invest fully into EV, is because Japan is simply unable to self-produce all the electricity required to power an EV dominated landscape, and would leave them geopolitically vulnerable to any actors wishing to exploit their energy dependency.

[@rogerphelps9939]

Japan has a huge offshore wind resource.

[@narmale]

because they arn't drinking the poison coolaid... EV is NOT viable with current tech im a master electrician

[@shannonwoodcock1035]

Toyota was resting on their laurels with the Hybrid. Toyota is the king of Hybrids. They were caught napping along with the rest of legacy. Giving EV's lip service but finding out by 2019 that Tesla is able to make them viable and when the Plandemic and supply system became paralyzed as most of Legacy auto is far from being vertically integrated, Toyota was frozen. By 2022 and the opening of Giga Texas and the first Model Y's rolled off. Toyota tore one down and declared it a "Work of Art". The grandson of the company either was forced or chose to step down. Any talk about "EV KILLER or TESLA KILLER" needs to stop. The game is over.

[@allegramanco1]

Look at the efficiency factor! Whether they produce the hydrogen or electricity by wind, nuclear or geothermal, they can deliver three times the amount of power to BEVs. Hydrogen may make sense where the mass of the batteries is critical, such as for trains and heavy trucks, but personal transportation is now so far ahead that hydrogen can't catch up.

[@Nikolas_Bourbaki]

How's that different from today where Japan imports 100% of its petroleum?

[@AZOffRoadster]

Sounds like a good way to keep engine designers, mechanics, parts suppliers and dealers employed.

[@fredericguyon1449]

And what is wrong with this when it makes the car cost half of what an electrical car cost.

[@Clasticon73i]

@@fredericguyon1449 The price of hydrogen 🤣. Also a lack of infrastructure to sell that hydrogen. Why wait when you can use an electric car now? If you do wait then what about advancements in battery technology? What if your future hydrogen car is actually worse than a future electric car whose electricity is cheaper?

[@gregdemers9686]

@@fredericguyon1449 the cost to build "A" charging station that can handle a few cars is roughly $2 Million and at the moment you can only get the hydrogen from fossil fuels. Currently there are only about 500 charging stations worldwide so it would take decades to scale up to be a reasonably available gasoline replacement. If you compare this vs an electric car charger that Tesla can install for about $40,000 per charger (so roughly $160,000 total for same amount of stalls as the hydrogen station), the economics alone would kill hydrogen.

[@nguyep4]

​​​@@fredericguyon1449 it doesn't, that is what is wrong.

[@FireballXL55]

You forgot the oil companies to lubricate the engine 😊

[@onemealmonster]

Toyota and Yamaha collaboration goes way back. They worked together on the LFA and if I'm not mistaken the 1JZ. They've always innovated and looked into new technologies before inception in the larger market (looking back at the Prius). I think they may use this as an option for gearheads who like working on their cars, people who like the sounds and feel of a vehicle, etc have an option, rather than just buying another EV. It might also allow for kits to be produced that convert current gas cars into hydrogen fueled cars tapping into another market.

[@ryansanders8928]

They go further back than that. The 2000gt was a Toyota/Yamaha collaboration.

[@onemealmonster]

@@ryansanders8928 oh yes!!! How could I forget that beauty!!!

[@trevorwhite915]

The thing about this engine is it is possible they could easily convert existing ICE vehicles. I have had vehicles running LPG (propane in the US) for years. In fact for many years in Australia most taxis were powered by LPG until they decided hybrid Toyota Camrys were cheaper to run.

[@mrpicky1868]

it is not

[@knote4958]

unfortunately existing ice vehicles won't be able to run hydrogen unless substantial amounts of money are spent on overhauls. Note when he was talking about the toyota V8 having hardened valves and valve seats. The valves/valve seats in existing cars are built for gasoline and would wear out running hydrogen. The only way to keep existing cars in the loop would be to create synthetic gasoline using hydrogen and captured carbon

[@richardmartin8998]

@@knote4958 I think the OP was talking about a new hydrogen ICE engine, and fuel system in an existing car. If that's the case, this is potentially far more feasible than modding a petrol engine.

[@knote4958]

@@richardmartin8998 You're still looking at a lot of money to carry out that swap, even if automakers against all odds decided to offer retrofit engines for existing cars

[@richardmartin8998]

@@knote4958 I agree with that. Actually I think it will come down to someone doing it as a dedicated conversion as a standalone business as opposed to a mod offered by Ford, GM, VW etc. The car manufacturers want to sell new cars not fix older ones, and the best way to do that is forced obsolescence.

[@tom8437]

When comparing emissions, you also have to look at emissions resulting from the production of electricity vs that of producing hydrogen. Did I miss that in the video?

[@Clasticon73i]

They use electricity to make the hydrogen. And to save money most would just hook up your hydrogen generator to the grid with no thought put into where the electricity came from. And the final nail is that because hydrogen is so inefficient you wind up using more electricity to do the same amount of work. All this to make sure some fat old oil exec has a soft landing when governments start banning burning fossil fuels.

[@redacted629]

As well as the car production and transportation. Instead of extending vehicle life and addressing the true problem its knee jerk reaction and other factors

[@baldok14]

There are 3 ways to produce hydrogen; blue, red, green. In blue, natural gas is used, for red its the nuclear power and for green its the electricity from renewables. I won’t even talk about option blue as its not sustainable. In the other 2 cases, its more efficient to use the electricity produced to charge batteries then turn it to mechanical motion, rather than generate electricity -> create hydrogen -> compress hydrogen -> transfer hydrogen with a truck -> turn hydrogen back into electricity -> electricity into motion. In the case of electric cars; produce electricity-> transfer it using wires (mostly existing networks) -> charge batteries -> electricity into motion. Each conversion of one type of energy to another loses efficiency.

[@mike160543]

Greenies are proposing making hydrogen using electricity. Sop there is a whole lot more pollution involved

[@alexndichu6629]

That's a weak argument from you, we have majorly invested heavily on renewable sources of energy

[@rogerhinman5427]

I can remember when the disadvantages made about EVs (lack of charging stations, inefficient method of travel because of range and charge time issues) were considered fatal to the entire concept. Time and engineering defeated or mitigated most of those disadvantages and I think the same will be for hydrogen-powered engines. After that happens I'm certain that somebody will jump at the chance to engineer retrofit kits for ICE vehicles.

[@bigchunguscultmember1267]

What I consider fatal to the entire concept is the lie that EVs are somehow going to fix all ICE related climate issues. EV owners just outsource their pollution to whatever energy infrastructure is in place.

[@firstjohn3123]

There can be no real retrofitting. It works in the short-term, but long term destroys the engine...¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯ although turbines are more adaptable due to the exotic metals used, Uncle Sam made car companies destroy the prototypes years ago....(Chrysler)

[@ecoideazventures6417]

Key question is when a newbie startup like Tesla invested in such a large charging infra, why didnt Toyota do all this while?

[@Xenon0000000000001]

@@ecoideazventures6417 Hydrogen filling stations are massively expensive to build compared to connecting some chargers to an existing electricity grid. They need to be able to store and highly compress hydrogen, and get the hydrogen from somewhere. After all that, the cost per mile of running a hydrogen car will be so high that no sane person will do it.

[@AtteroDominatus]

@@Xenon0000000000001 What about propane? They are already highly compressing a gas and transporting it for us all to have it. Also, compared to building a gas station, hydrogen would be soo much cheaper. Take it from a guy who once built gas stations for about 5 years of his life. The process to install hydrogen tanks instead of petrol or diesel tanks, isn't any different, just different hoses and connections. We already have the means to start building these tomorrow as the jobs are already there to start installing them. Hydrogen tanks also wouldn't have to be buried which would make installation faster, cheaper and easier.

[@harryh7819]

Many years ago, when fuel cells were showing a lot of promise, Shell was planning to use geothermal energy in Iceland to cleanly and cheaply mass produce hydrogen. Their plan was to ship it around the world in hydrogen super tankers. Solutions are out there, and Shell has done much of the r&d as well as some proof of concept.

[@ArkLord001]

Ballard is decades beyond them with the 1st truck built in 1988.

[@camielkotte]

Shell has evicted board members who were actually pro greenify the industry. I sold those stock shares immediately. It's s nasty company aiming only at profits.

[@Neojhun]

LOL SHELL! Another scam runs out of steam.

[@jamesvandamme7786]

@@ArkLord001 Hey, what ever happened to Ballard? And Shell's hydrogen scheme?

[@callak_9974]

@@jamesvandamme7786 Not sure, but since there's not very machines that use hydrogen as a fuel, they probably shelved the idea (for now). If there was wider adoption of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles where it actually took a few percentages of the vehicle market then it would make more sense for a company to spend the money on development. That's true with any new technology, they need enough capital spent to drive more innovation. Look at the touch screen, it was invented in like the 1960's. It took 40 years until Apple to use it for the iPhone, and it blew up from there. Now all smart phone and tablets use it, along with some laptop/computer screens. And a lot of new electronic systems have it integrated in now like cars, vending machines, etc. since the price of making one has dropped tremendously.

[@wk8219]

I have wondered for a great many years why we do not have exactly this technology. As a kid who played with electroless and was fascinated by burning hydrogen, I’ve always wondered why we couldn’t just make a regular ICE engine that worked in exactly this way. Good to see it finally happened, suspect it’s not the future though.

[@protonneutron9046]

Delusional. Physics is still physics. It takes more energy to create Hydrogen fuel than you get back. It is difficult to move, store and dispense. This is why it isn't used for automobiles. Toyota hasn't made any physics breakthroughs therefore this is a bust.

[@gregbailey45]

True, it's not.

[@germanmosca]

Combustion engines that burn hydrogen exists since the 70s. Mercedes played around with it back then. And BMW did in the 90s and early 2000s. Both gave up on it, because it's just to expensive for the mass market. And i'm not even talk the costs of making the car. It's the cost of the hydrogen if it isn't heavily subsidized by tax money. It's just simply impossible for a normal working person to afford to run a hydrogen car, and running a car with eFuels is even more expensive. (We are talking above 10 USD per liter here, though in hydrogen the equivalent in kg)

[@protonneutron9046]

@@germanmosca ya nailed it. The free market has spoken

[@davidondre1973]

@@germanmosca Well taxpayer heavily subsidised the e-car industry, good lobbyists seem to be the answer along with foreign influence/

[@mauzeking6661]

I think these engines do actually have a huge place in the market, first in heavy equipment that's hard to get to a charging station, for semi's, for people who live in rural areas, and farm equipment. Anywhere that range really matters. We also going to have problems with our electric grid being able to support this many EVs. The ability to generate hydrogen in one local area and distribute it has some advantages.

[@idonotwantahandle2]

Exactly. Also, Toyota aren't going alone; why? They want other manufacturers on the program to stimulate demand for hydrogen gas stations. Yamaha has history of collaborations so further work by Yamaha would eventually benefit Toyota.

[@hammerheadcorvette4]

I think it's being understated that Hydrogen Production is also not as easy as people think.

[@bonkwonkelchip7569]

@@hammerheadcorvette4 Yeah. But we need nuclear if we are going all electric and I doubt that's going to happen

[@mikeaustin4138]

The electric grid needs updating in any case, but most people will charge their EVs at night during off-peak-load times. Battery technology is advancing rapidly, so utilities will be able to produce electricity when it's most advantageous and store it for when it's most needed and EVs will have greater ranges and require fewer refueling episodes.

[@jonathanfields4ever]

Nah. If hydrogen is used widely as a fuel, hydrogen engines will be few and far between. You just can’t get good range if you’re burning it. Fuel cells barely work as it is, but engines are half as efficient (or worse).

[@charleswright9957]

I think Toyoda is trying to keep there service and parts relevant in the future

[@repatch43]

Completely, it's very disappointing anybody is even paying attention to them. This is exactly the same as how Kodak stuck to film despite knowing it was dead.

[@tarun1982]

Yes but with lies

[@rustyshackle917]

Toyota missed the boat when they invested in hydrogen instead of electric and will become irrelevant, and I say that as someone who has owned multiple Toyotas.

[@jugganaut33]

@@repatch43: if Toyota had done nothing. Saying petrol and deisel were irreplaceable. Then yes. But they’ve spent 30 billion on refining hydrogen combustion. Along with JCB. All that’s missing is the infrastructure.

[@michaeldickins9238]

Even as I’m trying to keep everything relevant too ( minus the polluters and those keeping things expensive and all In the dark)

[@robcarter6599]

As a leader in the hybrid game, they’ve got that tech already. Combine it with the relative cleanliness of hydrogen and I think you’ve got a winner.

[@KingOfAllJackals]

The introduction of battery/motor also enables regenerative braking. Pure ICE loses a lot of energy in waste heat (which needs to be managed) but what does get turned into kinetic energy is gone forever only to be turned into moving air or hot brakes. Also to your point, ICEs are used only for charging and not supplemental torque they’re basically generators on wheels. They can be optimized to run very efficiently at a narrow operating range vs any drive motor that operates over a wide domain of RPM, load and “throttle” settings. Every parameter from intake/exhaust cross sectional area, ignition and spark timing, cooling, lubrication, engine balance, etc can be optimized for a narrow and constant RPM range. You don’t have the muscle car that sings at high RPM/load but can barely idle and guzzles gas everywhere vs the anemic daily driver that sips gas, idles smoothly, cools easily but noses over at 5k.

[@HillHomeGaming]

Imagine the miles per tank if you had a Hydrogen Combustion engine in a battery charging hybrid set up. I get about 57 - 60 miles/gallon right now with my Honda Insight Hybrid. I continue to maintain the BEST way forward is exploring hybrid technologies and this seems to be an amazing pairing that should be tested.

[@stephjezo6470]

Problem is, batteries are anything but green and are insanely expensive to replace. We need to avoid them as much as possible.

[@dinozaurpickupline4221]

I can work with a 220torque engine that can charge a li-ion/sodium battery & run the motor also 50_50 load sharing etc or power train sharing any combo that can squeeze most miles With presets like low noise_vibration pure EV hybrid system 80% engine & 20boost of motor torque offered by motor Charging the battery & running the motor leaving the power train off, & Running 100 on engine & power train

[@HillHomeGaming]

@@dinozaurpickupline4221 I'm just all for squeezing out the most miles per fuel source and I just don't see EV being that. Additionally, a EV "solution" we would right now be needing to build a LOT of power plants all over the country to supply the demand it would cause on the power grid - which isn't happening at all.

[@TheMetalGaia]

Oh wow, I knew the Insight was efficient, but not THAT efficient! That's higher than most Prius models I believe. Very nice.

[@christianstorms3950]

in that combination, I'd guess a fuel cell would be better. But the ICE could bridge that development for more affordable cars.

[@hello201014]

I think for the efficiency of energy usage for EVs you should also factor the source of the electricity and the efficiency of converting energy to electrical energy. If the electricity source is not a renewable source, this efficiency can knock down the benefit of EVs in this particular aspect.

[@ecoideazventures6417]

Agreed, but majority of the electricity produced is already wasted if not stored in batteries. So if car users charge their batteries at night, then they are using power that is unused

[@D_Rogers]

Even with coal only energy an EV pollutes less because it doesn't waste 60+% of the fuel as heat... :) The problem with H2 is volume and storage. The problem for the H2 ICE engine is moving parts, a lot of them. And the problem with hybrids is... even more moving parts.. EV's get an extra win by just having less whirring clanking cogs to waste energy and wear out...

[@Xenon0000000000001]

You need even more electricity to create "green" hydrogen. Whatever issues battery EVs have from electricity generation, hydrogen has them 5 times worse due to being incredibly inefficient in comparison.

[@jimbopeebles8210]

And how do you make hydrogen 5head? 🙃

[@andrewhinsurance]

@@ecoideazventures6417 The same argument can be made for using excess energy to gather and store hydrogen then.

[@lucasevancy7564]

What about the power grid? It's not exactly efficient, and you don't consider it at all talking about the EV. There's also the additional carbon footprint involved in the creation of the EV and how much more difficult it is to recycle the EV materials, these are all things that should be in a fair comparison. A nice update on what's new, appreciate the video, we should explore all options with an open mind in my opinion.

[@angel-peralta]

Agreed, most of the electricity produced in the United States is either coal or natural gas based. However if modern nuclear would be widely adopted it maybe different, but as you said that doesn’t negate the detrimental effects of mining rare earth metals for EV batteries or recycling them as you stated. Often people want simple answers to complex problems. I’m grateful that Toyota isn’t falling into group think.

[@nikidelvalle]

I feel like the solution to this problem is obvious. These resources are rare on Earth but there's plenty of it in space, and we can extract those using destructive methods that we couldn't here. Maybe we could even produce them in space too. I know it seems kind of silly but it just seems practical to me.

[@jamesvandamme7786]

@@nikidelvalle Vacuum is not a resource.

[@nikidelvalle]

@@jamesvandamme7786 You do realize there are other planetary bodies in space right? And asteroids? They're full of the stuff. Asteroids in particular have tons of silicon, iron, nickel, platinum, etc. We destroy our natural environment when we extract these materials on earth, but extracting them on completely uninhabited planets and asteroids doesn't hurt anyone. We just need to build up the infrastructure necessary to extract and transport these valuable materials to where they can be useful. If we can create functional space station factories to make those materials into goods, we can also significantly cut down emissions and waste products.

[@jessewolford2354]

the mk5 supra had been incredibly successful tho along with the fact that the b58 is incredibly reliable. if i’m not wrong toyota stress tested all the components of the engine. As someone who would love to see internal combustion engines stick around I think toyota is making the right move, and i’m not alone.

[@jonathanf.9395]

Problem: the H2 pumps freeze after every fill-up and can be a problem if people are lined up to fill their tanks. Also, a typical station can only service 80 cars per day because the H2, even when compressed takes up too much space.

[@diggleda2952]

Would need electrolysis but how dare I put my brain power to this lesser crap

[@trevorhenriques7733]

Most people don’t have a CLUE how difficult it would be for everyday people to try to use Hydrogen as a fuel. I have seen people suggest that we just use the existing fueling stations we have and transition them to dispensing Hydrogen. NOT A CLUE !

[@filonin2]

@@trevorhenriques7733 People do it every single day in California but that's a magical future land.

[@seanplace8192]

Yeah, they need to install some kind of heater to melt the ice off of the dispensers.

[@trevorhenriques7733]

@@filonin2, I have worked with liquid Nitrogen, Nitrogen exist as a liquid below -195C. If you pour it on any part of your body, you will freeze instantly and if that part happened to be load-bearing, like say a leg, that legs could crumble to dust under the weight of your body. At the very least you get a BAD frostbite. Hydrogen exists as a liquid below -259C. Apart from it being very volatile as a gas causing possible explosions all over the place, do we really want to contemplate having canisters of liquid Hydrogen in the general population like we do gasoline today ??? I will continue to insist, THIS IS A VERY BAD IDEA !

[@ph5915]

I agree. I first saw a 60 Minutes episode like in 1980 where this village of people had their regular ICE cars converted to burn H2, it was in these huge tanks. Back then, it seemed like a possibility. But electric motors are far superior. I'm not sure Lithum-Ion batteries are the long term powering solution, but tech keeps coming up with new ways...

[@heyitsbroski]

Wrong. EVs are not superior.

[@Aqualastic]

@@heyitsbroski Wrong. He's saying electric motors are far more superior. Yes, and they're far more efficient. Whatever the future of energy source, electric motors will always be there.

[@zaca211]

@@heyitsbroski Electric motors are superior to gas engines in every way imaginable. Thats not an opinion either.

[@ghoulbuster1]

@@zaca211 if motors are so good, why isn't everyone using them? Oh yeah batteries suck, who would have thought.

[@gigsyoo15]

@@ghoulbuster1 thats the area that need improvements, turn suck to shut up and take my money. its still true tho that motors are godly good.

[@macloricott13]

I would definitely have one of these cars. I am a EU citizen, and the key point here is the relative independency from Chinese materials and products (batteries, really), not to mention the relatively high know-how that European manufacturers have in internal combustion engines. I would also mention that we know pretty well how to recycle old internal combustion cars, whereas recycling batteries is still a problem. Also, what is the energy cost for building a battery, in terms of resources and energy? I am under the impression that the future will be a mixture of technologies, not just one.

[@marktj1]

No problem recycling batteries, just try buying one!!

[@ChronotriggerJM]

Engineering Explained has an awesome video on this engine that just absolutely eviscerates it lol. Fantastic work Ricky :)

[@thecuriouslobster]

@ChronotriggerJM love his channel!

[@wt9653]

You do know by the time the v8 hydrogen cars come available. It would take 10 years or more just to match the numbers of EV charging stations we have now. By then, EV will be so advanced. The cars won't even need to charge from any stations.

[@kadmow]

@@wt9653 : lol, shades of "gone in 60 seconds" - by the time you get out there won't even be cars... History as yet hasn't taken the turn quite forseen by the most forward thinking futurists - just the sort dreaded by George Orwell...

[@MTrekker2001]

This engine would require a hundred gallons of compressed hydrogen to get the same range as gasoline from a typical 20 gallon tank. No room left for passangers and cargo.

[@Gersberms]

@@MTrekker2001 I agree, I'm not sure why they even bother with this thing. Toyota should know better, all it's good for is clickbait. When I look at EVs and how many moving parts they have, all I can think of is how obsolete these noisy, unreliable, and expensive internal combustion engines are. Who still uses a gas operated washing machine or Skil saw? Nobody. Lawnmowers, chainsaws, &c? On their way out. Hell, even electric tools with cords are being replaced with cordless variants that have more power!

[@TedToal_TedToal]

Hydrogen combustion engines perhaps would make sense for diesel locomotives, airplanes (in the form of hydrogen gas turbines), large mining trucks, oceangoing ships.

[@CHIEF_420]

@Toyota 💧

[@koma-k]

Locomotives, not so much - the current diesel powered ones are using the ICE to drive a generator to feed the electric motors in the bogies, so a fuel cell setup would make much more sense.

[@calmeilles]

To get enough hydrogen on a plane for a gas turbine to fly any distance it needs to be in high pressure cryogenic vessels that weigh so much there's hardly any spare capacity for passengers or freight. So, er… probably not. Mining trucks could be the most likely of the suggestions as they are powerful but only need limited range so remain close to their refuelling point.

[@alterbart7916]

Hydrogen does not make sense to be used in diesel engines, not pure hydrogen. Injecting hydrogen into a highly compressed air will result in extreme temperatures and horrible NOx emissions. And the diesel will lose efficiency and its torque.

[@TedToal_TedToal]

@@alterbart7916 This wouldn’t be a diesel engine, it would be an engine specifically designed to burn hydrogen.

[@kc8203]

I recall seeing that Ford and Cummins filed patents for similar engines. Should be interesting to see where the industry goes

[@huwgrossmith9555]

As you mentioned, in part at least, the production of EV batteries requires mining and processing of dirt to extract necessary minerals, eg Lithium (I hear rumours that there are in the wings batteries that will be based off of either Sodium Chloride or Carbon Dioxide but seeing is believing). I'd be interested to see a comparison of the actual cost to the environment of the actual "cost" to produce hydrogen (we, I believe are developing green hydrogen plants here in Aussie) vs the actual "cost" to produce the stuff that goes into the current EV batteries including building the batteries and the cars (loads of plastics) themselves. I recall, what we call here the RAC or AA, in Germany saying you'd have to do in the order of 160k kms in an EV to undo the enviro damage done building the vehicle. By "cost" I mean pollutants short and long term and, the energy used (and can that be renewable energy).

[@gregbailey45]

Still hetter ROI for pollutants that an oil burner, which only gets worse the oldet it gets! You can never win with ICE!

[@flatoot]

I'm still waiting for graphine to come into our lives. Over a decade ago it was discovered as cheap and efficient battery storage. Batteries must be like toothpaste. Always new and improved yet nothing changes

[@TheWindsurfk59]

Agreed, the environmental cost of battery materials sourcing and manufacture seems to have been glossed over in this video. If you've ever watched documentaries about this mining you can see that it destroys huge areas of forest and requires huge highly unclean machinery to mine just tiny amounts of these materials. Further to this I find it incredible that no one seems to be discussing the impact of nuclear power plants on the environment. Whilst the production of electricity from them is relatively green there is the issue of nuclear waste disposal that rarely seems to be mentioned or discussed. I understand underground nuclear waste storage facilities generally do a good job, however as more and more waste is produced how large will these facilities get and how expensive will the upkeep become to prevent leaks and contamination. I'd love to see a video that discusses these issues please @2bitdavinci

[@j.pgoodwin9020]

BYD has Sodium Batteries in vehicles

[@PandaKnight52]

All of the minerals would be mine anyways to make other technology. Hydrogen car would still need minerals and plastic like every other car. EV batteries last easy longer then we thought 10 years ago and once not really usable in cars can go to storage and then there are companies set up now ready for recycling of batteries to keep the minerals circulating in the economy. The recruiting process is also on its infancy and will get better.

[@mateialexandrucoltoiu7207]

Very good documented video, it must be noted that Japanese producers are incentivized to invest in hydrogen because of their new HTGR reactors which can produce hydrogen. However, it is unlikely they will export this around the world as they don't have China's financial muscle.

[@michaeldickins9238]

But heard that they getting hydrogen from Australia, look it up

[@mateialexandrucoltoiu7207]

@@michaeldickins9238 They must, however use carbon capture to make it "green" as it is produced from a reaction with coal. It seems like Japanese policies lately are somewhere between sci-fi and utopia.

[@DavidHalko]

@@mateialexandrucoltoiu7207 - “they must use carbon capture…” Australia must use Carbon Capture, but that is OK because carbon is needed in everything (ie plastics, fertilizer, roads, roof shingles, vinyl floor planks, batteries, etc.) so whoever has refined carbon will have an amazing opportunity to become a natural resources exporter of the future. Japan sees Hydrogen to completely eliminate carbon fuel imports, which is huge for them, especially with China being the proverbial 1000 lbs gorilla in the room.

[@jordanbrown7403]

Japan doing deals with america and uk,uk doing deals with us as are the koreans,private money is going into nuclear fission and fusion big time and lenr reactors are making ground

[@georgeholloway3981]

Why would you say Japan does not have China's financial muscle? What sort of muscle would be required anyway?

[@moosedrink]

One thing I really like about H2 is how well it pairs with renewables. The sun shines and the wind blows even when the energy provider doesn't win the contract to power the grid. All this free energy could be used to make H2. It could also be done by employing a smart grid for EVs, whereby people choose to buy/sell electricity to their plugged-in EV depending on market price. But this could be a harder lift to implement than installing all new H2 infrastructure, because you'd have to get the PUC to comply. Here in the US Midwest, Xcel has successfully thwarted a smart grid for over 15 years.

[@mikemondano3624]

There is no such thing as "free energy".

[@ygayovy]

@@mikemondano3624 thing is you can't just stop a nuclear reactor it keeps producing energy even if it's not being used. So technically that's what free energy is.

[@mikemondano3624]

@@ygayovy They are stopped all the time. If the energy were not used, where would it go? If the neutrons are moderated, they do not exist in numbers great enough to sustain a chain-reaction.

[@ygayovy]

@@mikemondano3624 Sorry but they are not.

[@ygayovy]

@@mikemondano3624 Nuclear power plants operate in the "base load" mode. Meaning constant output and all other means have to follow. Sudden change in load will result in emergency reactors shutdown resulting in 1000s of MW in losses, not to mention how complex their startup is to begin with. Generally we waste a lot of energy balancing the grid. But those losses usually come from "load following" types of generation. OR why can't we just balance nuclear power plants too by having them to produce hydrogen like Japan tries to do? Although they use reactor heat directly without losses on turbine, which are huge btw, hence effectiveness is actually as high in both methods. Bottom line: It's not always free per se but very close to be or at times actually is, like with solar.

[@NoHandleToSpeakOf]

Electrolysis requires very pure water in order not to wear out the catalyst and what not. Cleaning the water is another energy intensive step in the chain that is often overlooked.

[@charlesminckler2978]

So many people overlook this. Much of the US already uses more than it’s yearly rainfall totals and are using up aquifers. What would happen if millions of gallons of gasoline were replaced with hydrogen? Tell farmers they have to choose between watering crops or filling their tractors.

[@robburns1ne]

The vehicles could resuse the water and not need to purify it again. Add a water tank, instead of exhausting the water vapor. When refueling, the purified water can be transferred to the fueling station.

[@NoHandleToSpeakOf]

@@robburns1ne as the video says - there are traces of lubricants in the exhaust. Still need to treat that water.

[@robburns1ne]

@@NoHandleToSpeakOf I was taking about FCEV. ICE H2 makes no sense whatsoever.

[@sinirliadam]

The range loss in winter for EVs is not only due to the lack of heat generation for the cabin. Turn off your HVAC system and you're still at a big loss. Babying the battery under every situation but the ideal is the biggest problem of the EVs. Also, they did the Lexus LFA's V10 engine with Yamaha as well and that was a glorious machine. On the other hand they built their first electric SUV with Subaru too.

[@thepurplemaskknows9383]

I have driven EVs since 2012. I hear about the loss of potential in cold weather but I just use my cars. To that regard, I have never been inconvenienced nor noticed it, although I know it's there. I had more noticable cold weather drivability issues with the ICE cars I drove for decades, but I just adapted to them and just used my cars. People just look for crud to be dissatisfied over.

[@sinirliadam]

@@thepurplemaskknows9383 You had to adapt before because there was no other choice. Now that there is, it's pointless.

[@Neojhun]

Also if you have access to 230/240 power or even better a Level 2 Charger. You could just preheat the entire car on Charger Power. That helps improve range in winter by a decent amount. Modern BEVs have always been heavily engineered for Snow Climates. I just hate the misiformation that BEVs can't hand the cold. There are freaking BEVs in the ARCTIC CIRCLE.

[@sinirliadam]

@@Neojhun That's "IF" you have access to those. Also, It is not misinformation if it's true. No one is saying they freeze and die in cold weather. Just that they loose a lot of their range.

[@Neojhun]

@@sinirliadam that IF is not difficult. I'm not asking for any high powered multi phase or DC charger. Just a single phase 230/240v outlet will do the trick.

[@Just_Pele]

Sourcing materials for batteries isn't the problem, our very poor electricity infrastructure is. There's no way we can charge everyone's EVs at once, we're not even close to that in the USA.

[@rockystaatz521]

I like the idea of it actually being used correctly in combustion and the potential grows exponentially for ability like other combustion engines

[@protonneutron9046]

Delusional. Physics is still physics. It takes more energy to create Hydrogen fuel than you get back. It is difficult to move, store and dispense. This is why it isn't used for automobiles. Toyota hasn't made any physics breakthroughs therefore this is a bust.

[@gregbailey45]

"Correctly" lol.

[@rogerphelps9939]

Why exponentially? It has next to no benefit and is quietly dying.

[@CaptHollister]

The "correct" way to use hydrogen is actually in fuel cells. That's pretty obvious from the efficiency and emissions differences.

[@protonneutron9046]

@@CaptHollister of course. But ya still have the production, transportation and storage problems which are not yet solved.

[@samuxan]

I can see this working for things like trucks for long haul travel. And it would be quite interesting to explore the use of H2ICE for aviation. But at a consumer level for everyday it has the same problems as fuel cell without any obvious improvement but a few extra shortcomings

[@matthewdilks2677]

I think jet engines are more for aviation. Maybe converting an old plane to hydrogen would be cool

[@williammeek4078]

It is even worse on efficiency than fuel cells. Already HFCEVs can only just match the best BEVs. Now imagine a truck with half the range of a BEV truck. That is hydrogen ICEV.

[@timogronroos4642]

Hauling is about the cost per mile. No company is going to bet the most expensive option

[@beyondfossil]

Yes, and the two biggest shortcomings are poor efficiency and NOₓ emissions. The efficiency of all internal combustion vehicles is horrible -- can't get around the physics of combustion. Jason at his Engineering Explained channel white-boarded the hydrogen combustion engine and showed a massive hydrogen tank is needed to match the standard EV 200+ mile range nowadays due to internal combustion hydrogen's terrible efficiency. Our atmosphere is 78% nitrogen. So _any_ high temperature combustion in our nitrogen rich atmosphere makes production of toxic NOₓ unavoidable _even_ with clean hydrogen as the combustion fuel. This is also part of the issue of banning natural gas ranges in homes because of the NOₓ produced in enclosed indoor environment makes it all the more dangerous.

[@easyxpress]

H2ICE for aviation? There's the tragedy of the Hindenburg disaster before, it will take a lot of convincing to make this happens.

[@russelljimenez4715]

2 Reasons why they did this: 1: Enthusiast vehicles. Instant torque is cool for making interior GoPro shots of scaring your mum, but the engines have no character at all, and once the novelty wears off, you have an extremely heavy car that feels heavy. Light cars just feel better to drive. 2: Converting existing engines to hydrogen is really just a case of mounting a tank where the fuel tank was, changing the injectors, and tuning it. Yeah, there is more to it than that, but not by much. It is pretty easy overall.

[@georgeflecknell]

Cars having "character" and "feel" will hopefully not be a thing much longer. I've every hope it will be illegal to manually operate transport within my lifetime.

[@BB-cf9gx]

Toyota continues to examine every possible technical solution.

[@rogerfroud300]

Toyota is deluded.

[@williammeek4078]

And will keep doing so until they are out of business here in a decade.

[@tommy605]

I like the idea of this engine for those of us who enjoy the sound of an ICE. Here's another thing you touched on that is a consideration for those of us who live in an environment where 4-7 months of the year is spent with the heat on snow tires on. The efficiency in cold weather. To lose half the efficiency in an EV for half the year is a serious consideration. I think Japan is onto something, even if the market for it won't be massive.

[@maryhadda8420]

What about the people who enjoy the sound (and smell) of a horse?

[@chrishar110]

If an EV is not so efficient at cold temps why Norway has so many EVs? Do they have warmer winters?

[@rogerphelps9939]

You might like the idea but you won.t like the cost, that is if it ever happens.

[@flipadavis]

You precondition the battery (warm it up remotely) before you leave. If it is plugged in while preconditioning then you lose very little range. If your EV has a 350 mile range in good weather then you might end up with 250 miles of range in really cold weather. On the other hand with an ICE hydrogen vehicle with every space stuffed with 10,000 psi tanks, other than the trunk and back seats, you will get maybe 150 miles in warm or cold weather. You could get to 350 miles if you fill the back seats and trunk with tanks while increasing your curb weight by another 1000 lbs.

[@66kale]

​@@maryhadda8420Yes. So what? Both of them are just fine

[@elliotsimpson3591]

Overall I love the commentary, perspective, and informed analysis of this video, comparing H2ICE and H2EVs, but one thing I would have liked to have seen would be the efficiency of H2ICE as compared to current gasoline ICEs, as well as the negatives of the current EV storage media.

[@danielcampbell6146]

And the cost of mining lithium and cost of recycled ev vehicle's 😂nobody looks at burning batteries either they can be dangerous.

[@adamsaint5879]

exactly. that's the real question.. EVs don't have legs beyond where they already are for reasons is simply impossibility of the next stage. so the real competitor is Gas engines and diesel... lets go a step further and include in that comparison LNG (liquified natural gas for storage and obviously not so int he vehicles mainly) for engines also as this is a promising tech. ways to make hydrogen are actually numerous already, ranging from harnessing waste heat of other industry and creating it from natural gas.. of course electricrolysis... a HUGE key advantage here over gas and fossil fuels is they can be made for use by country, anywhere, more or less onsite. dont need pipelines to send it from here to there, refineries not needed and the world politics.. not needed.. STILL as astoundingly good as this is Im sure some radical ideologues will find reasons to think its bad... but generally speaking.. a place could use this free of external inputs. think plentiful nuclear power as the input and efficiency gains over time with inovatios. I can see how this works long term

[@Nordickaiser]

​@@danielcampbell6146lithium isnt the biggest issue it's easy to get, nickle and cobalt is more rare and harder to get a hold of. It's called a lithium ion battery but that's no the main components I believe. Source was Elon musk talking to lex Friedman

[@LionheartLivin]

Hi Ricki, thank you for the video! A few things: why compare the most expensive model 3 (performance) at $53k when the base model costs $40,240 before incentives (after incentives it's below $35k). This would put it square in line with the "H2 ice" you have at $40k at 07:33 . So I don't see the upfront cost advantage of H2 ice Also at 8:20 you state hydrogen fueling stations "work like gas fueling stations" - so does the pump at a gas station frequently freeze onto the opening of a gas tank like a hydrogen station, or does a gas station have a potential of the software inappropriately locking the handle of the pump onto the gas tank opening as often happens in hydrogen refueling stations? - this happens even several minutes after fueling is complete FYI. Does a gas station need 20-40 minutes to go through some kind of cycle in between cars like a hydrogen station, thus frequently forcing people to wait over an hour in long lines to actually get hydrogen even though the fill up, if it works, only takes 5 min? Do gas stations have an app that say they're working but when you get there even within 5 minutes of checking, it often isn't working? Is a hydrogen station like a gas station in that residents around it demand no usage after 11pm because it's so loud (this is the case for the hydrogen station in Hayward, CA - there maybe others -- it's a MUCH LOUDER process than gas). My experience: 1 miserable year with a honda clarity fuel cell vehicle. I've been able to get a "5 min" fill up about 1/4 -1/3 of the time. Otherwise I've had the car towed several times, once every 2-3 months, because fuel stations weren't working (even though apps said they were), or after waiting 1+ hour and having 2-4 cars in front of me the station runs out of hydrogen! My family GLADLY returned this hydrogen car and bought a model Y - we are quite happy with it:)

[@TwoBitDaVinci]

very good point... especially as the lower cost models are more widely available... yah i think it just gets harder and harder to understand the thought process!

[@LionheartLivin]

@@TwoBitDaVinci Indeed, and thank you so much for engaging!!!;)

[@joeking433]

You're right, it's the dumbest idea ever. The public will never go for it compared to EV's. Toyoda is just as dumb as a box of rocks.

[@aaronwilliams1249]

The last time I checked, a few weeks ago, over 30% of all hydrogen fuelling pumps in California were down, and every time I check it's about the same or worse. It doesn't help that hydrogen costs over $16/KG, so it's also a lot more expensive to operate than a BEV or even gasoline powered vehicle. And a few years ago there was an explosion in Santa Clara that shut down all of the northern California hydrogen stations and took over 6 months to recover. There are also plenty of accounts of people having problems actually getting hydrogen for their cars (see the fact that at any point 30% or more of the pumps are offline). Also, hydrogen vehicles have a limited lifetime. The hydrogen components have a mandated expiration date. And those hydrogen trucks? They can only carry 300-500KG of hydrogen, which can fill a fraction the number of vehicles as a gasoline tanker truck, making transport far less economical. I also ask you to read the sticker shown at 10:49 in the video where it says, "Do not fil after 2029/11" After that date, you are no longer allowed to fill that hydrogen vehicle. Hydrogen, especially at those high pressures, is extremely reactive. It embrittles metals and will leak through everything. So basically, after 2029/11 you need to replace the vehicle.

[@thecooky7744]

At one time people had a fear of gasoline blowing up, now not a though about it

[@williammeek4078]

Definitely a pipe dream. The size of the tanks needed makes it worse range than BEVs.

[@seanplace8192]

Yep. The tank size coupled with the inefficiencies means it's kind of limited in its usefulness. I think it may only work for something like converting classic cars to a cleaner fuel. Most people don't drive those things on long trips, and typically haul them to car shows anyways.

[@davidmay268]

Exactly. He should have mentioned this, the prototype for this had no boot, because it was just full of tanks.

[@mysilentnoise4510]

The interesting aspect of hydrogen’s potential (for me) is the potential for decentralized (mom and pop investor) local hydrogen production. Big $ power companies are afraid of losing their monopolies. Plus, the potential to store an extra hydrogen cell (once properly designed) for emergency use (similar to an extra gas tank) is a unique advantage over EVs. Not one single EV on the market has a backup fuel source.

[@BlkRider]

Of cause it has. It's called Tesla Powerwall. I mean a lot of houses today have solar and a backup battery. It might not be as fast and filling the petrol tank but hydrogen is not a petrol either and it is not that easy to get it from one tank to another.

[@keithjohnstone3537]

You could make this same argument for solar panels etc couldnt you with BIG energy. However, that hasnt stopped these things coming to fruition, so its possible as they know they will still make more money than they can count. The big companies will buy out their direct competition in the industry as they can afford to when the market goes in a different direction, like BP buying out EV charger companies for example. Its their market, they will maintain it as they have the resources to scale them and make the existing owners rich.

[@mysilentnoise4510]

@@BlkRider A Tesla Powerwall as a “backup” power source for your EV? Do you suggest strapping it to the car’s roof?You really have me confused!

[@mysilentnoise4510]

@@keithjohnstone3537 Valid point, but I’m still all-in for the underdogs in the industry coming up with new innovations and market competition!

[@joz1765]

I would consider this because they would be more affordable and would have that great sound which electric car don’t. offer. Yes, it’s more complicated to work on then a regular gas vehical but open any hood and you wounded how mechanics do what they do. I like the idea of options and a reduction in removing raw materials from the earth to make them..

[@germanmosca]

Plot twist: They are not more affordable. Electric cars are already cheaper to produce than ICE cars, of course you as a customer don't notice that because why should the Manufacturers sell if for cheaper if they sell their stuff just fine at their current prices. The second thing is, that Hydrogen and eFuels are much much much more expensive. Ans that's after scaling the production. The only way they are affordable is by massive tax substitution. We are talking over 10 USD per gallon here (respectively the equivalent in kg for hydrogen)

[@Aesthention]

​@germanmosca where's your sources stating that because I have numeral from this year showing they cost 40% more to produce than an ICE. Even if they were cheaper, they're not better than ICE because while they do achieve "100%" efficiency, the power suppliers to them only achieve around 30% efficiency. We're not creating energy more effieciently, we're simply trading off who makes the energy. The only way EV's becomes cheaper, and more efficient than ICE, is when we can produce enough power from renewables, find more environmentally friendly ways of mining the materials, and ways to recycle the batteries. Current government subsidies make them as affordable as they are now. Once we hit a majority milestone, they'll shoot up in price when subsidies are removed.

[@jediofthejungle]

@@germanmosca can you tell me how much it costs to charge an electric car. From empty?

[@charleswright9957]

I'm 76 years old and grew up in a automotive town and worked on ice cars for a lot of years still have one but the car I drive most is my Telsa.

[@duhaneyparkclassics7484]

Fun watching people argue to keep box tv's 😂

[@iowa_don]

As Tesla Bjorn noted when he was testing the Toyota Mirai the car takes about 5 Kgs of H2 to fill from a station that has only about 25 Kgs available without converting more liquid H2 to gas and compressing it for delivery. In total the H2 station can only fill about 80 cars per day. Compare that to a gas station with a 5,000 gallon tank filling cars with 20 gallon gas tanks. The gas station could fill 250 cars.

[@rogerphelps9939]

Compare that to the electricity grid which can handle a complete changeover to all BEVs with only minor upgrades.

[@phalanx21860]

@@rogerphelps9939 no, it cant.

[@FreddieVee]

Unless I'm mistaken, internal combustion engines will still require oil & oil filter changes, air filter replacement, tune-ups and transmissions no matter what the fuel is.

[@dpjazzy15]

Another important factor that people don't notice, is decompressive cooling. When your fuel is a compressed gas or a gas compressed to a liquid, it cools the inside of the cylinder when it's injected. This effect can do a lot for engine longevity.

[@sonofamortician]

hydrogen has to be kept cold for storage, it DOES CAUSE HYDROGEN EMBRITTLEMENT< it is an issue, not just where it is decompressed.

[@phil2156]

​@@sonofamortician it's not liquid hydrogen

[@dpjazzy15]

@@sonofamortician They have newer materials that don't suffer much from hydrogen embrittlement. They can also reduce the amount that leaks out to nearly zero.

[@dpjazzy15]

@@phil2156 I specified both. A compressed gas that's decompressing also cools down very quickly. It can be good for keeping the engine cool. CNG and LNG engines currently benefit from this effect.

[@gregbailey45]

Petrol does the same thing. As it evaporates, it cools down the fuel/air mixture.😮

[@Pluckee13]

Great video! Love your stuff. Isn’t this like saying we can train your horse to poop in designated areas by changing the feed? It doesn’t really surprise me. Toyota is clinging on to what they know best and try to squeeze every potential out of an ICE vehicle. As for the prius, its great but it was a transitional vehicle to get us to the next generation. But that would mean we have been in transition for 25 years. By now, i would have expected a full ev or hydrogen prius. Same goes with the Supra. They should have brought it back as a full EV made solely by them to compete against the model s and then trickle down what they learned onto normal/consumer vehicles. Toyota has become reactionary trying to stay relevant.

[@douglaswatt1582]

Agreed. It is sad although not unusual to see an original disruptor become entitled and encrusted. Toyota is so bound to the Japanese reverence for tradition and authority that they just can't get outside the old box. They are on the bubble towards bankruptcy in five years on their current trajectory.

[@dianapennepacker6854]

This engine is a joke. Look up Real Engineering video on it... Liquid Hydrogen ICE engines isn't going to happen. It is such a stupid idea it isn't even funny.

[@davidmay268]

Toyota really need to be careful, they have already lost the lead they had and they are making terrible decisions over and over

[@Moshe_Dayan44]

As the owner of a 2008 Prius and 2012 Prius V in Ottawa, Canada, I can tell you that the transition to all-electric is not so inevitable in my area until they can solve the problem of the vehicle losing significant range in cold weather (it gets down to -25 celsius here a few times during the winter!) and the battery losing charge over time, even it it's not driven. Not to mention the problem that people who live in apartments (I'm lucky that I have a two-car garage) don't have access to chargers overnight. Basically, we'll need batteries that have the qualities of super-capacitors in terms of very fast charging, but also little to no loss of range in very cold temperatures, or when left sitting for a few days. A gasoline hybrid-electric car, by contrast, has the same amount of gas in it after several weeks. I will be holding onto my Prius' until these improvements happen, or until they simply wear out. However, at this point, both cars are still going perfectly strong.

[@Pluckee13]

@@Moshe_Dayan44 I totally agree and you have proven my point. Toyota has been sitting around with the Prius for too long. I would have guessed they would have solved these problems by now. They were saying they would have solid state batteries by now. I’m a fan of Toyota, I own a Prius (I like the new one but its a reactionary update) and use to own a Supra ‘95. I would hate to see them go.

[@magniankh]

If hydrogen is cheap to produce, burns clean, and fills a tank quickly, who cares about the efficiency?

[@garysandhu5082]

Have you done a segment on synthetic fuel yet? If not please do. Great video and channel.

[@rogerstarkey5390]

Energy intensive to produce, no more efficient, hugely expensive.

[@robburns1ne]

⁠@@rogerstarkey5390: less expensive than fossil fuels when internalizing the externalities. Economically efficient is more important than energy efficient.

[@vuvision]

There are already plenty of videos on this topic.

[@teslasnek]

When comparing pricing, don't know why you used the most expensive version of the Model 3 as the example. You can get a base model 3 for as little as $25,000 in some states

[@richard77231]

"In some states". Assuming you're referring to tax credits. Should really compare MSRP to MSRP when comparing, not artificially selectively reduced pricing.

[@teslasnek]

@@richard77231 Still, why use the Model 3 Performance when the much cheaper base model is comparable?

[@samuelpeinado1267]

Another benefit of H2 ice is more readily possible to convert existing gasoline ice. This would save alot of resources and impact to the environment. I’d buy or convert to h2 ice tomorrow if there were stations around.

[@MB-ny6is]

The fuel cells currently used by Hyundai can optimistically last around 10 years or 5000 hours (whichever comes sooner). Then the cost of replacement totals the car. With batteries this isn't much different. I'd rather have a less efficient but repairable car, which can last as long as it's properly cared for, and has a non-zero resale value. So I'm really rooting for the H2 ICE.

[@logitech4873]

NMC batteries can last 10-15 years. LFP batteries will last much longer, luckily.

[@MB-ny6is]

@@logitech4873 if only you could charge them from 0 to 100% in 5 minutes, I'd pre-order one today!

[@alibro7512]

Engineering Explained made a video about this engine 7 months ago. He worked out the range between refills was pitifully small like between 50 and 100 miles. That's worse than a ten year old Nissan Leaf. 🤣

[@jonathanf.9395]

Yeah, but me want VROOM VROOM!!! VROOM VROOM NOW!!

[@alibro7512]

@@jonathanf.9395 I hope you have deep pockets then cause Green Hydrogen will be two or three times more expensive than petrol/gasoline. If it isn't green hydrogen then your better sticking with dino juice.

[@MTrekker2001]

Let's reinvent the steam engine. Power it with hydrogen. Should get about 20 miles per refill.

[@truth6565]

That video was lowkey an attempt to appease Elon Musk if you ask me. It was very bias and poorly thought out

[@Mububban23]

@@truth6565 which part of his mathematics was flawed? I'm not good with numbers so might have missed it

[@scottboyd8892]

The main reason Hydrogen station are not all over the US is due to a political party that isn’t making money from the act. The Government gave money for the electric stations to get started and I mean a lot of money. Just as Elon Musk received for Tesla and he received money from other Countries. He also has produced other battery sources other than just for vehicles. Hydrogen is by far the better way and it is very close to what we have now. The hydrogen engine will last much longer and the replacement of a lithium battery is outrageous in price making the vehicle obsolete. People don’t want to say political, but this is. Look at what the US government has did to diesel engines. They ruined the engine and it breaks. Not might, it will because of the DPF and the sensors go out all the time.

[@jonnyrouse830999]

My only worry with EV is what happens with the battery at the end of the life of the car. I like the idea of hydrogen combustion engines

[@tood6459]

Right? Even if you eventually need a new Hydrogen engine, compare that to the cost of a new battery pack for your EV.

[@frankdelarosa9527]

They probably expect you to forget about that old clunker and buy a brand new EV.

[@rednecktek2873]

A couple key things you're glossing over, even though you're mentioning them earlier, is the lower up-front cost of the H2 engine which will lead to better adoption, and the big area that ALL of the EV's out there have being energy density. That's one of the HUGE hurdles that EV trucks are having is that by the time you get enough battery for the big vehicle and 300m range, there's no payload left. If and when we start seeing salt batteries, which are about 30% larger than LFP which are larger than Li-Ion NMC that's where physics rears it's ugly head and stomps on the technology. Toyota has been working hard in Japan to get the H2 infrastructure out there to supply these vehicles at home, but you're absolutely right that it's not going to take off here until someone says "All of out Mobil/Exxon/Arco/Chevron/Whoever stations will have H2 pumps as of $Date." Once a major supplier picks an alternative energy source, pretty much EVERYONE will go to that fuel type, be it EV, H2, or even Ethanol.

[@jamesvandamme7786]

Ethanol or butanol might be viable green synfuels, but they will not be cost competitive with BEVs.

[@burnin8able]

I mean the major drawbacks brought up against h2 ICEs is that there isnt infrastructure to support them, but thats something you could advocate a shift towards as part of green energy initiatives. Require existing fuel companies to provide a hydrogen fuel option, and require car companies to invest in developing their own h2 ICEs. Establishing a specific goal for companies to compete against to earn market share would guarantee that costs plummet for consumers while establishing the infrastructure needed to facilitate the use of h2 fuels.

[@geoffstrickler]

I don’t think it’s the long term solution, but it may be an interim solution, especially if someone commits to putting it in OTR trucks and finds a partner to provide nationwide hydrogen filling stations. It’s quick refill capability is a huge benefit for trucking, and other long-range transport. Might also be useful in shipping and/or rail transport.

[@ghollidge]

I think that we are a species we have stopped where we are because it works for us. Until we push pass where we are we'll be using ICE for awhile

[@cplai]

I disagree. It is not popular now because hydrogen delivery infrastructure is lacking and clumsy. But some recent research found a way to absorb large amount of the gas into a powder and release it on demand. Given a storage solution , hydrogen can be produced anywhere with solar panels.

[@geoffstrickler]

@@cplai doesn’t sound like you’re actually disagreeing with me.

[@cplai]

@@geoffstrickler What I meant was hydrogen can become the long term solution because better storage technologies are on the horizon. So I disagree this is only an interim solution.

[@geoffstrickler]

@@cplai Storage isn’t the main issue with hydrogen fuel, it’s separating the hydrogen from water or other sources that is very inefficient. Add in the costs of compressing and storing, and the total cycle is pretty inefficient. It’s useful, but I don’t think it’s a long-term solution.

[@RichardPoogerman]

Honestly it seems like a more prudent first step than forcing the EV option by government mandate. The grid and supply chain for a massive switch to EV just doesn't seem to be there yet, or even capable of being there by the time these mandates occur. As well, it seems like it would be somewhat easier to leverage the existing infrastructure we have to provide for the fueling, and the experience would be a lot more familiar to the average driver and less time consuming and thus easier to sell. Also having the same type of cold weather experience as petrol ICE engines is a huge plus in my opinion, but then I live in northern New England. I vote Hydrogen ICE but that is also because I would miss that vroom, vroom noise 😉

[@flipadavis]

Does it really make more sense if you have a combustion engine burning hydrogen that only gets you 150 miles of range? Unless you also fill the trunk and back seats with 10,000 psi tanks then you might get to 300 miles.

[@RichardPoogerman]

@@flipadavis I do not have a lot of knowledge about this but I'm guessing your 150 mile range estimate for a hydrogen ICE is based upon the efficiency loss compared to a 300 mile range hydrogen fuel cell vehicle with a battery supplied electric motor and this may well be true. The range though could easily be doubled by adding an additional "tank" without adding a lot to the weight. Obviously, electric vehicles are more efficient, I just still can't get past the battery aspect. Batteries require a huge new amount of mining to produce, they most likely have a shorter life span than an ICE engine, they add more weight to a vehicle than an ICE engine, they aren't easily recyclable, and they suck in cold temperatures. It is a very complicated subject way past my pay grade but I still vote for hydrogen ICE if only for the vroom, vroom. Also, the driving performance of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles sucks, adding to the lack of marketability. Speaking from my gut, which has usually been very accurate, I just don't see how grid powered EVs will be capable of powering, even the majority of, our transportation system in the next 10 to 15 years.

[@flipadavis]

@@RichardPoogerman "The range though could easily be doubled by adding an additional "tank" without adding a lot to the weight." Again the problem isn't weight as much as volume. HFCV already use every trick in the book to fit as many 10,000 psi carbon overwrapped tanks that they can fit into a car chassis and still have a functional car in order to get 350-400 miles. These aren't just one small tank but multiple tanks in various places. In order to double the range of a combustion hydrogen car you would need twice as many tanks as they already have and there would be nowhere to put them but in the spaces like filling the trunk and back seats.

[@RichardPoogerman]

@@flipadavis According to the information I could find, the Toyota Mirai's fuel cell is the size of a carry-on suitcase and weighs a couple of hundred pounds.

[@flipadavis]

@RichardPoogerman-fn4ck That's the fuel cell. The fuel cell is like the engine in an ICE. The tanks are what takes up all the space. Look at a diagram of the 2023 Mirai and where all the tanks are. There is no room left for more tanks.

[@billj5645]

We have a lot of ICE cars, there is less waste in converting them rather than junking them and making everybody buy new EV. We've been running ICE on gaseous fuels for a long time- butane, propane, natual gas, so there isn't that much work required to run on hydrogen. And no harmful emissions. All we have to do is find a good way to generate the hydrogen, and a way to transport it and dispense it.

[@teslasnek]

LFP EVs negate the rare earth materials problem.

[@jpm8082]

It’s always interesting to me that every one of these types of videos GREATLY under estimate the downsides of EVs (environmental, practical, and social dangers), especially the idea of an all EV market. I think it’s fair to point out the current challenges of Hydrogen ICE, however, I notice a majority tend to focus on them in a much more pessimistic light than the challenges with EVs. The challenges with EVs are always framed as things that will eventually be overcome with innovation, or minor inconveniences, the challenges with any other technology tends to be framed as something that are vastly overwhelming and impossible to innovate. IMO, it looks like these commentators either have a vested interest, or have been far too influenced by the hype/propaganda. I can name a number of serious downsides to EVs off the top of my head but somehow these guys always minimize and limit them to only a couple minor issues.

[@AnemosFPV]

Because EV are so fast and they think Elon Musk is smart. If they knew how dumb Elon was they wouldn’t have loved EV so much

[@luk4s56]

@@AnemosFPV evs are good for the future, in stuff like buses, and trains. but for consumers i dont like that idea one bit

[@AnemosFPV]

@@luk4s56 I’m sure that it’s a horrible Idea for busses. Have you seen EV busses when they catch fire? It’s 100 worst then EVs

[@luk4s56]

​@@AnemosFPV i dunno, there are around 3 mil buses world wide, and 1.5 bilion cars. thats like less than 1 percent of vehicles. with majority of them belonging to transportation companies, i believe its alot easier to regulate and watch over their safty than bilions of cars on the road that got the exact same issues

[@AnemosFPV]

@@luk4s56 how many of them are electrical? The EV dream will die soon

[@bjgaspar]

"...once you get used to your EV's range, the anxiety wears off..." Because you've altered your lifestyle to fit your car's range. No thanks.

[@47ravenlord]

Hydrogen tech makes a LOT more sense than current EV's. We just flat out have terrible energy storage/battery tech right now that is developing at a snails pace and literally bottlenecking all new tech. If we can't store energy efficiently the most logical solution is to produce it and use what is being produced more efficiently....and Hydrogen tech does exactly that. But let other vehicle manufacturers keep peddling EV's that have multi thousand pound batteries that cost over half of what the entire vehicle costs and have to be replaced after 5-7 years.....there are enough idiots in the world to keep that industry afloat, sadly.

[@rogerclaiborne6815]

Japanese conversion to hydrogen vs. electric makes perfect sense for them becoming energy self-sufficient. Especially since their nuclear reactor waste heat can cheaply produce more hydrogen than they will need. Lithium and petroleum leaves them vulnerable to foreign market manipulation and restriction. Plus disposing of lithium batteries becomes a major problem if everything in modern society uses them exclusively. The Japanese are wise long term thinkers who enjoy solving engineering challenges.

[@TwoBitDaVinci]

very true, we talk about this in our japanese pink hydrogen video... very good and insightful points! I'd love to share a pint with you one day! cheers

[@passby8070]

Don't let Toyota's miss information fool you, there is plenty of lithium in the world. Its now 70% off it peak due to new supply coming online continuously. Besides, Sodium is going to make a huge impact on the ev and stationery storage. Theres a time and place for hydrogen where it could be used, but frankly, use it for small vehicles are already decided to be a lost case.

[@darksidehero]

No one disposes of lithium batteries. They are recycled.

[@george6696]

Remember if you live in a house with solar panels, you can charge your EV car without paying any extra taxes and no middle man like the petrol stations like Shell and BP, this is why the media is attacking the image of EV vehicles, A new Sodium solid state battery is on the way. You can charge up in 10 minutes and the battery range is 1200km. A four years old kid will know which is better.

[@Jaasau]

I think it is awesome. I am not a fan of EVs at all, and this could be a solution for all of us reluctant adopters.

[@ChummiaChan]

I recommend reading "Hydrogen Hot Rod Magazine" it definitely is a good escape from all this political nonsense in the comments section trying to silence gearheads and make them burned out. I'm not a fan of slavery child labor in Africa mining lithium with bare hands for the big EV Industry either.

[@yourhelmsman]

What, indeed, is the advantage of a carriage without a horse? (I had my man take this comment to a telegraph office for me, I won't have that electrickery in my house!)

[@vexedmirage4678]

I don't have anything against EVs themselves. It's their cult following, and political insanity to mandate we follow their cult, blindly, that irks me more than anything. They seem to have this wack world view that their BEVs are 100% carbon neutral/pollution-free, just cause they don't produce emissions; and that everyone needs to kowtow to their cult or the world is going to end. Meanwhile, evidence has been produced that showcases a ton of the pollution BEVs produce from their manufacturing to their disposal. I personally think the hard push for BEVs is because of the stranglehold China has on much of the world with their control of rare-earth mineral mines. Largest exporter of Lithium-Ion batteries couldnt possibly be using their position to force world governments to push for products that would make China richer. No way. The EV cult just traded their Saudi masters for their Chinese masters. Personally, I believe that until a fuel/power source, that is both strong enough and powerful enough, to replace diesel linehaul trucks is put forth, diesel will not be going anywhere. BELTs are just not a viable thing. And probably never will be. Massive weight+extra long charge times(even with rapid charge)+depleted battery efficiency, shuts down any possibilty of BELTs being viable.

[@Keimoj]

I love the video nice overall pass :) I feel that subject turned more about comparing EV and ICE whereas imo the pollution and efficiency should be compared to gas/diesel compustion engines. I was left with a question how efficient are the ICE compared to normal gas combustion. And the mention that there is emissions I guess they are no where near to what current solutions (beyond EV) are. Used to also be a carmechanic and would say that ICE repair costs interest me. Since the addition on more and more elctricity to our vehicles it has created the issue of not being able to do any self-repairs and Japan & Toyota (like VW) have been really big in part manufacturing and repair centered manufactory and design. Do you have any thoughts oon Gas-EV-ICE repairs? And just to clarify :D I am by no means against EVs or ICEs I just see a possibility to have both and tbh even support eachother to get emissions and prices down. Even the ICE and EV gas stations (afaik) can be combined to an extent

[@pfwag]

Throw in the negative environmental impact of producing EVs, this could be a game changer.

[@andrewcawdell]

It is refreshing to see a fair comparison of overall efficiency for BEVs and hydrogen ICE vehicles. At present there is no justification for using hydrogen to power general transport because the energy used to produce hydrogen would go nearly three times as far in a BEV.

[@minienigma]

Thanks for the great presentation of both the pros and cons af H2 ICE. I would challenge, however, the supposed "durability" of H2 ICE as opposed to battery degradation of BEVs. In my opinion, the H2 storage tank is likewise highly susceptible to degradation as well -- being subjected to repeated cycles of extremely high pressures during refueling. How well does the H2 storage tanks (both the refueling stations and vehicles) stand up to those stresses (and the cost and complexities of that) is not well known. I seem to recall from other KZbin videos on FCEVs mentioning that that the H2 storage tank degradation issue is a real concern. Not only is the tank subjected to extremely high pressures, but the material that the tank is made out of is probably subject to degradation as well because it has to resist reacting with the H2 being stored.

[@gregbailey45]

Carbon fibre overwrapped pressure vessels. Ask OceanGate about their long term reliability.

[@whateverthedaybrings2268]

What kind of pressure are you talking about? We still use pressurized tanks from 50 years ago still hold pressure with repeated use; including hydrogen. I would assume they are trying to keep the tanks strong and light. We have cylinders capable of repeated use, they just may not be as light as they would like.

[@peterdlima543]

When combustion occurs using hydrogen, heat is generated. Similar to using petrol, diesel, kerosene, biofuels etc. Heat is the reason for global warming, not carbon.

[@Angeloflight444]

I personally believe this is quite promising and it will fill its own niche application. We shouldn't think in terms of "either/or", but that each technology has its own particular applications that make it more suitable than others depending on the situation. We shouldn't be political, we should be practical. Thank you. 🙂

[@rogerphelps9939]

It will be an incredibly small niche and will not be relevant to you.

[@staticrysis]

One undisputed advantage to ev that seems to be overlooked is all the energy is transmitted by wire instantaneously and without the loss of transportation by tankers.

[@tubewatcher5012]

Yea, and all the energy lost during that "instantaneous" transmission is astronomical from any nuclear, coal or other electrical production facility to that EV.

[@CuriousPug12]

As a passionate car enthusiast I really hope this could work and become the future of cars especially ICE cars

[@kyledenis7350]

@TwoBitDaVinci Great video, I appreciate the insight. I have a question though... Why is the effiency for Hydrogen ICEs considered such a big negative? A regular petroleum gas engine is only about 30% efficient. If we consider the fact that electricity has significant efficiency reductions in the production process and delivery to a charger. Shouldn't those be factored in as well?

[@snufflebear]

As long as you factor in all the fossil fuel infrastructure, refining, transportation as well, then you can make that argument, which would also add into the inefficiency of H-ICEs, since they would basically have the same thing.

[@kalmmonke5037]

sustainability matters more then effiency, ev stuff isnt sustianable , hydrogen is, and theres engien designs that coudl allow no burnng of fuel and lower tempurature burning for no emissiosn at all, like a theretical turbine charging electric drive, innengine that a youtuebr call driving 4 answers made a video on, sir joseph center free piston engine , all of whch could charge recyalable electric motor liek what mahle was talking about, run by sustinable stuff liek hyrogen , propane, e fuel, biodisel etc, with emissiosn reduced to a meaningful extent. laws are also claerly not designed for lowering emissions etc, the same corperatiosn governemnt who promote climate change narrative use it to basically tx productivity , they destory nuclear power despite that being the best conflict reducing "green" solution ever which cannot be replaced, check out tony heller , suspicious observers, magnetic reversal news, tom nelson, seriescalled hwo blackrock conquered the world " by corbrett report on substack website

[@rshollis]

The reason Toyota is putting R&D budget into H2ICE is the reasons you specified in your video. EVs are not the one-and-only solution. They simply do not fit every transportation need today. Maybe that will change in the future, but at the moment, they are unsuitable for long range transportation such as cross-country shipping, colder climates where battery efficiency drops significantly, and areas where the local power grid can't support large numbers of EVs. This technology has the potential to decrease emissions within the infrastructure and budgets we have at the moment. Great presentation, thank you!

[@Bambihunter1971]

Some of us want to still drive a vehicle with an engine and not a motor. We like the sound, the feel, etc. Also, I for one have became opposed to EV's largely because they are being legislated and forced onto us instead of letting the market drive the direction. If not for this, I might already have one, but I'll probably be a hold-out now. Remember EV's have been around for over 100 years, but ICE mostly put them on the shelf until recently with the introduction of better batteries. I think the EV world has become really impressive. But, in the video it basically said little to no maintenance. I suppose that is true if you are one that trades in your vehicles all the time. I typically drive take care of my stuff and most of mine are still going at least 20+ years, and 250k+ miles later (with original engines). In EV, that would be 2-4 battery changes depending on model and capability. In some cases, that is 1/3 the cost of the car and some that I have read about (which may not be true - the internet being what it is), said due to the placement of the batteries, replacing them is something akin to a frame-off on a classic car restoration. I am in I.T. in a large data center and I know I constantly am changing UPS batteries. We are actually looking into other short term energy storage methods such as very high speed spinning flywheel in a vacuum instead.

[@prietocwb]

building/shipping EV batteries still have a high carbon footprint today, is this considered in the comparison like the fluids and components of the hydrogen engine?

[@Scubongo]

Excellent video, and I agree with all of it. But you forgot to mention one thing, the price of the fuel. If they can make hydrogen very cheap, efficiency doesn't matter all that much anymore. Fossil fuels were never efficient either. And now I think there is a way to make hydrogen very cheap, with thermal plasma electrolysis. Hope you check this technology out! It's from a company called Hiiroc. I really want to know more about it. They claim they can make hydrogen for a price that's 4 or 5 times less than normal electrolysis with renewables, the so called green hydrogen. They call theirs "emerald" hydrogen. Yet another new color. There's also pyrolysis. BASF is planning to make hydrogen this way. It would be great if they could that ASAP, and replace steam reforming with it. Both these technologies would be carbon negative if they use biomethane. The only byproduct is black carbon. So please take a look at this! I really want to know more about these technologies. Converting biomethane into hydrogen and black carbon, would be a good alternative to BECCS. Hydrogen production would then extract carbon from the atmosphere, while at the same time decarbonize hard to decarbonize industries. The perfect technology if you ask me, but does it work like they claim it does? What are the negatives? Can you figure that out for us please? Thanks!

[@peterhall8572]

JCB UK has developed a hydrogen ICE for its heavy plant machinery that's been tested continuously for some time now as batteries are too weight restrictive and machinery needs to work continuously not sit recharging for 8 hours a day

[@peterjackson2625]

Best way to cut down on emissions is to stop travelling. When I was a youngster, petrol was heavily rationed; diesel was only for commercial vehicles. People walked or cycled to school or work. Or queued up for the bus. Buses were far more efficient, because the conductor collected the fares. 2d/mile for an adult.

[@colonialjim9154]

Hydrogen is so abundant. Once we figure out how to store and isolate it we’ll be cleaner and more efficient as a society. EVs are a scam and to make them is more destructive to the environment than the average ICE vehicle. Some studies have shown that you’d have to drive a small EV 180,000 miles to offset the carbon that went into producing it in the first place vs the fuel used over that same period with an ICE vehicle.

[@bipulkumar9310]

Very eloquent and informative documentary 🎉🎉 As for concerns about NoX emissions from ICE lubricants, maybe far smoother silicone oils can replace traditional engine lubricants

[@Xenon0000000000001]

The NOx emissions are from burning fuel (in this case hydrogen) in air at high temperatures. Air is mostly nitrogen (78% N₂), and at high enough temps it ends up combining with oxygen in the air to produce NOx. The small amount of carbon emissions come from the engine oil.

[@Aesthention]

Issue is, sure, your EV gets "100%" efficiency. Except the energy sources used to create that power only achieve a 30%ish efficiency. So really, we're not creating energy more efficiently, we're simply trading off who makes the energy. Toyota's hydrogen cell achieves 36%, thats just as good, and sometimes better than our nuclear power sources. The only way EV's become "environmentally friendly" is when we can power them using solar and wind, which, we cant even do with our current energy infrastructure. I'd say Toyota is offering the best possible way of future transport with there Hydrogen cells. Now we need to advocate to our governments for better implementation

[@nunyabidness674]

What about NO2 emissions? While I am highly familiar with the concept of an internal combustion engine, my question actually stems from gas turbine power plants. The main reason we aren't using hydrogen for power generation isn't the material cost of building the plant, it's that the emissions from burning hydrogen are slightly higher than natural gas. Personally I have been working at overcoming that particular issue, and have been designing a modular system, but I had to go with electrolysis for hydrogen generation so that I would also be able to use the oxygen as well to lower emissions, bringing the NO2 levels down but also essentially providing a potential bomb...

[@nexusbox-i1q]

Problem with assessing energy efficiency of EVs, is that it ignores everything that goes into mining the elements, creating the batteries, battery replacements, etc. It's not a cradle to grave analysis and it just shifts the inefficiencies into different parts of the lifecycle. Also, the likelihood of replacing every combustion car in the world with an electric will take 100 years.. but if Hydrogen works, every car becomes a 'greener' car. Scale is the key to a greener economy. EVs won't scale at the global shift that's required. If it's not Hydrogen, then it will be biofuels, or something else. EVs won't scale because every vehicle will need to be replaced.

[@dylangti]

Yamaha and Toyota have been partners for some of their most iconic engines, such as the 2JZ (Which was in Supra, High end Lexuses) and the Lexus LFA. If anything Toyota deciding to Partner with Yamaha again for this concept shows how seriously they are taking this technology.

[@Fractal-618]

Thank you for the picture of the double Hachi-Rokus at the start of the video :)

[@gblancer7493]

Like gasoline and oil, lithium is not a renewable source of fuel, even though you can produce electricity easily we will run out of usable lithium. Hydrogen doesnt have that issue. We will never run out of it.

[@TheFastcraig74]

Many companies have partnered with Yamaha over the yearsand every engine that has come out of siad partnerships has been a gem

[@yanchesanchez]

What i get confused about is that batteries seem to be the furthest thing from "green" though right? Doesn't this have a huge environmental cost?? I know combustion is less efficient, but i mean, shouldn't the complete chain of production and disposal be added to the environmental cost of the use for any fair overview of how "green" something is?

[@lkeil84]

I see two other cons rarely addressed. The cost of hydrogen is like 4-5 times that of gas, and the other is the recovery time of the station until it can fill another car in 5 minutes. You certainly cannot fill 12 an hour, more like 4 tops. That is unless you put in several large tanks and many really high capacity 10,000 psi pumps. This station would cost millions to make and maintenance would also be costly, hence the 4-5 times the price of gas.

[@alexlerwill344]

I think the NOx argument was understated, research I found in 2021 showed NOx emissions can be higher in H2 ICE’s than traditional fuels. Also I failed to hear anything on hydrogen embrittlement which mean engine will need more than just a rebuild when the time comes. Great to hear Japan is moving back to nuclear but last I read in 2021, Japan was going all out with coal powered hydrogen plants to bring the costs down to then invest in making it green when it matures. Is that no longer the case? heavy duty vehicles and extreme low temperature applications will make the H2 ICE’s a good investment in the future and keep the petrol head movement alive if people are willing to accept anything from the head to the fuel tanks are no go areas with insane training.

[@danielbrowniel]

to get similar range of petroleum with Hydrogen, HALF the car would have to be a tank. (which is kind of cool if you ask me)

[@RUHappyATM]

The issue I read is the H2 tank in the car. It would have to be very, very strong to store liquid H2.

[@Zripas]

It can't store liquid H2, liquid hydrogen needs -252C or lower temperatures, so no go on liquid hydrogen straight away.

[@michaelyoungman5503]

I heard and believe the negatives for the hydrogen fuel cell and combustion engine, but where I failed to hear is how many electric vehicles catch on fire, how many batteries end up in landfills…and their counter parts solar panels?

[@EdwinNew]

If you can work out the shortcomings of hydrogen ICE cars, I'm sure Toyota can too, and they have the capacity to do what Tesla did to make hydrogen more widely available.

[@the1sgjohns]

Thank you again for a good video giving the pros and cons on EV, H2 and Hybrid H2 and EV. I have a better understanding of each now. I have a hybrid car (gas, electric), and its wonderfully bridging the gap between the tech; gas and EV. I am not sold on EV alone mainly due to the battery and how it is manufactured and the enormous amount of energy production necessary to supply to EV; so the H2 fuel cell (not the ICE H2) seems more promising to me due to cold temperature problems with EV. I think Toyota is fleshing out the issues with H2 with partnerships and spreading their research costs. Which may produce a gen 2 or 3 H2 later. Seems like (and please correct me here if I misunderstood it) the H2 might be better suited to commercial ventures like trucking companies and government vehicles. This would reduce emissions again and give our electric grid infrastructure some breathing room to ramp up for an electrified society. That said, diversity is the better course in my opinion. Having lived through blackouts I was still able to cook and draw water due to back up diesel generators (city level for water) and natural gas for cooking. I still think the nuclear option is the most viable especially with thorium and sand silo batteries (as described in your earlier videos). Thanks again and keep them coming.

[@antoniocruz8083]

If you have an array of solar panels you can use it to charge directly an Ev with a motor with 2 bearings. But instead you can use that electricity to produce hydrogen, store it in huge tanks, distribute it by truck and ship and store it again at the gas station, all this under high pressure and to be fed into a motor with a thousand moving parts. Something is not right here.

[@yourhelmsman]

I would say that what's wrong is a lack of understanding of basic physics and efficiency.

[@richardbarber4444]

JCB Excavators are building their big machines with hydrogen ICE because to use batteries adds 10000kgs. weight and doubles the price, plus many excavators operate far from an electricity supply whereas bulk H can be delivered to sites. As a retired farmer I understand the need for a high density power source, diesel being the preferred fuel, because of the need for constant power. Visualise a 500 HP machine running at full throttle for 8 hours every day utilising 75% of rated power amounts to approximately 15 gallons/hour or 120gallons/day . or 1200 kW hours of electricity, more or less. That is a big battery!

[@Lovenpain]

You will never convince me to own an ev. If they catch on fire, it done. And good luck on the fire dept putting it out.

[@gregmckenzie4315]

As a boy I learned from my chemistry teacher that hydrogen gas is dangerous, in part, because when mixed with air it has a broad range of mixtures at which it is explosive. Compare this with gasoline, for example. In order to cause an explosion gasoline has to be carefully mixed in the right proportions with air. (This is why we need a carburetor to make the engine run.). Not so with hydrogen. It is a gas that can become explosive in a wide range of concentrations. Is this correct? How does this affect consumer safety?

[@maktham2006]

Plug-in hybrid is a clear winner here, and I hope more people notice this. How? By taking the pros of each system and removing the cons; you don't need to carry a heavy battery wherever you go and wait for hours to charge it, and at the same time, you don't need to use the inefficient engine all the time. Make a controller that prioritizes using energy from the battery (when available) and then switch to hydrogen or ammonia. The daily drive of most people doesn't exceed 100km; therefore, a small battery back is sufficient, and when occasionally there is a distant trip, the system will switch to hydrogen or ammonia. The problem of inefficiency here is significantly reduced, how? Because roughly let's say, for example, from 10 daily trips, 9 out of them with an energy-efficient driving of 85% and just 1 with 36% efficiency; therefore, overall efficiency is 80%. Even this is cheaper to manufacture (I didn't make cost calculations) but you need just a small battery and no need for an expensive fuel cell.

[@raymondtribunal9539]

I wish there was a breakdown of what it costs to drive compared to the other vehicles.

[@kamron_thurmond]

The fact that they do not use Rare Earth elements is going to be what makes this competitive with EVs. Hydrogen being the most abundant element in the universe just makes this a lot better in my opinion overall. As soon as we get past the massive upfront cost of making the hydrogen harvesting infrastructure and getting in place all fueling stations in place. I think it'll be competitive with gasoline based combustion engines, and long term solution for replacing fossil fuels which are still heavily relied on for creating the electricity used in electric cars.