Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study

Post by gumby » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 2:39 AM UTC

PakG1 wrote: post #56

jfengel wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're a car company committed to keeping the internal combustion engine. They are market leaders in hybrid cars, but have been surpassed in all electric. So they're not a fossil fuel company but their interests are aligned.

Their various significant investments don't strike me as being committed to keeping the internal combustion engine. Rather, they're simply evolving and the internal combustion engine influences their evolution. But I see no evidence that they're committed to it because they like it in particular. It's just what they've been good at already, and hydrogen interfacing with it may make sense.

Post by XorNot » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 2:41 AM UTC

jojobas wrote: post #48

jfengel wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're a car company committed to keeping the internal combustion engine. They are market leaders in hybrid cars, but have been surpassed in all electric. So they're not a fossil fuel company but their interests are aligned.

There's nothing wrong with internal combustion per se, if electrolysis+ICE works out cheaper than battery in terms of lithium/rare earths/whatever there is no fundamental objection to it.

Post by XorNot » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 2:44 AM UTC

credit_guy wrote: post #52

cbkeller wrote: post #12

I'll go one further: Hydrogen does nothing. It's a bad battery. After following this for more than a decade (starting with a bit of undergrad research on possible alternative fuel cell electrode materials -- albeit not a field that I'm in any way involved with any more), it just feels like there's been very little progress on fuel cells, or on storage and transport. Meanwhile, progress on Li-based batteries has been…

Hydrogen is the way to send energy from sunny places, like Australia to not-so-sunny places, like Japan. You can't send batteries, and you can't lay a cable that long. You can try to pack that energy in a different form of chemical energy like ammonia, or methylcyclohexane, or methanol, or synthetic methane or gasoline. The jury is still out. Europe is investing big time in hydrogen too, so chances are that hydrogen…

Post by fomine3 » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 2:48 AM UTC

kodachrome64 wrote: post #58

jfengel wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're a car company committed to keeping the internal combustion engine. They are market leaders in hybrid cars, but have been surpassed in all electric. So they're not a fossil fuel company but their interests are aligned.

A hydrogen fuel cell engine relies on completely different principles than an ICE and would still require complete retooling of their powertrain manufacturing. If anything, their hybrid powertrains are closer in design to BEVs than FCEVs There are good reasons for hydrogen over batteries, like better range and short refuelling times. I'm not sure why there's a need for some nefarious motive.

Post by ryao » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 2:49 AM UTC

toast0 wrote: post #24

Hydrogen powered vehicles are like natural gas vehicles, but worse. Pressurized fuel tanks expire, and your vehicle becomes a pumpkin, because parts+labor to replace the tank on 15-20 year old vehicle doesn't make sense. But hydrogen is even harder to work with than natural gas. And it's yet another fueling network to build.