Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study • Hacker News Board

Re: Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study

#171

Post by fwungy » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 5:21 AM UTC

The developing world, where Toyota sells a lot of cars, isnt going to EVs anytime in the foreseeable future. It's only the G7 countries that are really pushing it.

Both EVs and hydrogen fuel cells really need modern nuclear power to make sense. Hydrogen is less efficient, but storage is much cheaper and easier than it is with batteries. They're complementary technologies, not competitors.

People need to get over the idea that aggressive decarbonization will ever spread past the 500 million citizens of the G7 states. That's delusional. We should really be more aggressively planning mitigation than Hail Mary green transitions with multiple substantial challenges.

Re: Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study

#172

Post by glandium » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 5:31 AM UTC

zdragnar wrote: post #90

gumby wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Toyoda himself has publicly stated he's an internal combusion fan and is not interested in all-electric vehicles: https://www.autoblog.com/2021/09/21/toyota-toyoda-questions-... https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news/how-the-world-s-most-va... https://cleantechnica.com/2021/11/15/toyotas-team-japan-aims... https://www.hotcars.com/why-toyota-is-investing-383-million-...

If you read the articles, his point is that the industry cannot completely switch over to EV production and bans aren't the right solution, considering how rapidly japanese cars have reduced their CO2 emissions. There simply isn't yet the battery production capability to ban ICE yet. Their hybrids and hydrogen are part of the all-in approach. Considering that, he claims, cars have cut CO2 by 24% in 20 years, the onus…

There also enough power production. To give an example, the Tokyo governor invited people to lower their heating devices and wear turtle necks to avoid exceeding the current capacity.

Re: Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study

#173

Post by syncsynchalt » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 5:32 AM UTC

fwungy wrote: post #171

The developing world, where Toyota sells a lot of cars, isnt going to EVs anytime in the foreseeable future. It's only the G7 countries that are really pushing it. Both EVs and hydrogen fuel cells really need modern nuclear power to make sense. Hydrogen is less efficient, but storage is much cheaper and easier than it is with batteries. They're complementary technologies, not competitors. People need to get over the…

> Hydrogen is less efficient, but storage is much cheaper and easier than it is with batteries

And storage is even cheaper and easier with gasoline and diesel. More likely that developing economies will stay on ICE engines until batteries+electricity+chargers become cheaper than ICE.

Hydrogen doesn't have a future outside of location- and weight-sensitive applications like carbon-neutral air travel.

Re: Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study

#174

Post by seanmcdirmid » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 5:35 AM UTC

ruchir wrote: post #151

danans wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I didn't know Toyota was a fossil fuel company, or was owned by one? > Japan is uniquely trying to make this thing work You have conflated Toyota with Japan there. Even in a society dominated by it's megacorps, they are not necessarily the same thing. After all, Nissan brought us the first mass market EV (and yes, they promptly punted on their first mover advantage). > Anywhere else on the planet: sure, this might…

> why not just use the electricity directly and not pay the 40-50% penalty of electrolysis? because EV battery disposal can be a huge environmental problem. electrolysis is zero waste.

EV batteries are recycled quite easily. The lithium alone makes recycling worth it, but pretty much everything about it can be recycled.

Re: Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study

#175

Post by fwungy » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 5:35 AM UTC

jiggawatts wrote: post #31

Hydrogen is 100% an attempt by fossil fuel companies to remain relevant in a "green energy" world. The primary source for hydrogen would be from methane in natural gas, and they could then sell this as a "zero pollution fuel" while continuing their non-renewable energy business as normal. If you read between the lines and look at the companies involved, they're always linked to fossil fuel companies directly or indir…

They are not competitors, they are complementary. Hydrogen is cheaper and easier to store than electricity is. Hydrogen provides resiliency because of this and is better for long range vehicles because it can be produced and stored relatively easily.

Re: Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study

#176

Post by stephen_g » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 5:39 AM UTC

gruez wrote: post #94

tshaddox wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn’t ICEs be worse for local pollution?

What pollution would hydrogen/oxygen combustion produce?

NOx is formed from combustion in air, from the nitrogen that makes up much of the air. If you could feed it pure oxygen then you'd avoid that but nobody's going to want a car with an oxidiser tank onboard.

Re: Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study

#177

Post by stephen_g » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 5:45 AM UTC

_8j50 wrote: post #140

jiggawatts wrote: post #31

Hydrogen is 100% an attempt by fossil fuel companies to remain relevant in a "green energy" world. The primary source for hydrogen would be from methane in natural gas, and they could then sell this as a "zero pollution fuel" while continuing their non-renewable energy business as normal. If you read between the lines and look at the companies involved, they're always linked to fossil fuel companies directly or indir…

Battery based technology requires rare earth minerals which only a few countries control from what I understand. It is also not feasible due to weight to ship batteries to transfer power, you can only use them near the power source, is that not correct? Desalination is desparately needed, one byproduct is hydrogen: https://scitechdaily.com/efficient-seawater-desalination-and... Solutions that solve multiple problems…

EV batteries don't actually contain rare-earth metals (but fuel-cells and catalytic converters in ICE cars do). Some types of electric motors use them (in the permanent magnets), which is where a lot of the confusion probably comes from.

Re: Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study

#178

Post by zogwarg » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 5:48 AM UTC

shagie wrote: post #76

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.

> They're a car company committed to keeping the internal combustion engine. A vehicle running on hydrogen isn't an ICE. These are fuel cells. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Mirai This is an electric vehicle which generates power through hydrogen fuel cells rather than storing it as electrical energy in a battery (though it has a battery too). > Toyota's latest generation hybrid components were used extensively…

Their main approach to Hydrogen might be fuel-cell, but they have had one-off sports cars with ICE using Hydrogen.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_hydrogen_internal_comb...

I wouldn't completely discount the idea of them pivoting from the fuel-cell in the face of ever-stronger competition from other types electrical generation components.

Re: Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study

#179

Post by scottLobster » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 5:53 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.

The fundamental objection is quite real: Distribution. Hydrogen, due to the small size of the atoms, requires perfect seals and even then can slowly penetrate even metal containers. Cooling it enough to liquify it requires extreme temperatures and pressures as to destroy any efficiency gains.

Someone has to build that infrastructure, and do it on a national scale, for hydrogen to have even a chance at beating EVs/Hybrid/Gasoline cars. Say what you will about EVs, at least we already have an electric grid.

Re: Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study

#180

Post by danans » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 5:53 AM UTC

runarberg wrote: post #157

danans wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A transfer to EV will not be practical for all current fossil fuel vehicles But we can transfer most of them to EVs, including nearly the entire light duty vehicle fleet and short haul trucking, which is probably good enough. There will always be niche cases for ICE vehicles, like driving across Siberia, or military vehicles. But the vast majority can be electrified. Flight is a different story, perhaps hydrogen wi…

> But we can transfer most of them to EVs, including nearly the entire light duty vehicle fleet and short haul trucking. No we can’t. We don’t have the industrial manufacturing capability. Not even by a long shot. And even if we did, we don’t have enough minded minerals to supply the manufactures, and even if we did, we don’t have enough electrical infrastructure to charge all the electric cars. Note this also applie…

> No we can’t. We don’t have the industrial manufacturing capability. Not even by a long shot. And even if we did, we don’t have enough minded minerals to supply the manufactures, and even if we did, we don’t have enough electrical infrastructure to charge all the electric cars.

We don't have it today, but none that it is out of reach within a decade or two. Also, EV manufacturing is strictly less complicated than ICE manufacturing (as many engine parts suppliers are discovering). That's part of the reason you see so many EV startups (Aptera, Canoo, Lightyear, Rivian, Fisker) able to bootstrap vehicle manufacturing. That hasn't happened since the days of Preston Tucker.

The claim about never having the electrical infrastructure is similarly unfounded. We don't have the infrastructure for all 100M passenger cars in the US to switch to electric today, but with enough time we can certainly evolve the grid to not only charge them, but also utilize them for the purpose of grid stabilization.

> The best path forward for immediate success is public transit, using whichever technology is available (hydrogen, battery, overhead wires, diesel, whatever).

I agree that public transit is the ideal - and follow through by being a daily public transit rider myself. We absolutely should be providing better alternatives to individual car ownership, but that won't happen overnight, and it frankly requires a cultural change in much of the US that is a generational project. We can't make the perfect the enemy of the good, so in the meantime, we need to evolve the current paradigm - passenger cars - away from ICEs.