Toyota’s hydrogen-powered Mirai has experienced rapid depreciation

The green party has been pushing the green hydrogen goals for decades. Use google translate on https://www.mp.se/politik/energi/ or look at archive.org for historical goals. https://www.mp.se/just-nu/mer-el-och-gron-baskraft/ is more of the same.

If you want something more official, here is a discussion within the Swedish government and by the largest political party: https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/webb-tv/video/interpellationsdeb...

That's the experience I'm drawing from when I point out that "virtually no other part degrades in performance the moment you use it" isn't based in reality. Everything is constantly wearing out. Anything rubbing on another thing, any fluid being pushed through a hole, anything that might be reacting with another thing, its all slowly getting more and more out of spec. And when it gets more and more out of spec, its performance gets worse. You might not immediately notice it, that performance might not be in the go go kind of performance, but it isn't working as well as it used to.

Are you really going to tell me a car with a couple hundred thousand miles on it running all original parts (assuming they didn't literally break apart yet) is likely to be anywhere near the same performance as when the car had 200 miles on it? Its not. Its almost like there's a reason why mileage is considered when people price cars. The suspension isn't going to keep the wheels as well planted, the cylinders likely don't have the same compression, those fuel injectors are likely tired and aren't spraying optimally, that coolant pump is worn down and barely able to pump coolant anymore, your timings are likely not optimal anymore due to slack in the timing chain or belt, your spark plugs aren't making as full or reliable of spark, etc.

If your response is "well you would have replaced those by now"...well, why would you have to do that? Because they...had their performance reduce over the life of the part?

And even then, a part of that break-in period of those parts is the part's performance actively changing over the life of the part with pieces of the part literally degrading, just pretty quickly and positively for performance as opposed to negatively. That positive slope of performance change is a pretty early hump though, otherwise as I mentioned you'd be taking me up for ensuring all your tires are near-bald (but not quite, they haven't actually failed yet!) all the time and you'd be dumpster diving for the good stuff out behind your auto parts store.

That theory didn't play out, mostly because the price of electrics kept dropping year after year, undercutting any appeal in early investment in hydrogen.

You're asking questions that were answered in the very post you responded to. You're also simply inventing costs, such as 50% power loss.

What is the precise cost? You don't know. If you research the precise cost, my post discusses "what about the future after research", but this upsets you too.. for, researching things is a waste, you say.

(Even though you realise h2 is used elsewhere, and any improvements would help those industries?!)

For power, a real world example is that charging a car, tends to result in ~15% power loss. Some is converted to heat. There is also power loss in keeping the battery warm, when it's cold out (-20C). There is power loss when it is very hot outside, when draining the battery too. There are also transmission costs related to power infrastructure, upwards of 15%. When generating h2, the stored gas is simply transported as is, 30% plus loss of gas seems unlikely.

Batteries also age, and as they do, they are less and less efficient at discharge/charging. They lose range:

https://www.slashgear.com/2008627/tesla-owners-reported-batt...

Losing significant capacity is unhelpful for range. Further (same article), most car companies recommend not full charging on a regular basis, to extend battery life. So you lose range over time, and you're not really supposed to charge to full. Great. So much for that range!?

You ignored my comments on recycling, by simply saying there aren't many batteries to recycle?! This is an absurd response, absolutely absurd. The point is adoption, and every car requires recycling at end of life. We're comparing car tech side by side, and your response is "well there's only a few of these horribly polluting battery cars!". What? Recycling a horribly polluting tech is just that. It's amazing how the most environmentally conscious among us, simple ignore that electric cars are cesspools of 1000s of pounds of polluting materials.

Lastly h2 works perfectly right now. It is useful right now. It has range as long as electric cars.

These are the sort of arguments that are constantly leveled against h2. Ones without any real research, with made up figures, and not comparing battery tech in the same light. Ones ignoring the downsides.

If people had this attitude when modern battery based cars appeared on the market, no one would have tried a single one.

The ranges you showed were inaccurate, for the reasons I cited, including 22 minutes to charge under only special circumstances, with super special very rare chargers.

When I stop to refuel a car, I put fuel in and drive through. I urinate often on the side of the road, or (what takes 2 minutes) while the car pump runs.

Driving 1600km is under 12 hours driving, including those stops. No I'm not tired or lacking in focus at the end of that time. It's only 12 hours.

You'd need to recharge three times time make that range, or 22 minutes * 3 plus the fact (which you are ignoring) that you can't drive where ever you want and get that speed of charging. No way.

If you think driving for a few hours is dangerous, you are completely out of it.

This is the problem with these discussions. People sugar coat all the issues, and pretend they don't exist.

And this isn't even a conversation about "use fossil fuels". Oh no. This is "you'd better use MY green tech, or you're nuts! and I don't want you to even try another tech, how dare you!"

The more options we have, the better.