this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2023
210 points (94.9% liked)

Futurology

1856 readers
69 users here now

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] expatriado@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

sink cost fallacy was strong on the hydrogen tech

[–] Alto@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

For passenger vehicles sure, but hydrogen is likely the war forward for long haul trucks

[–] zurohki@aussie.zone 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe. Hydrogen is very expensive.

Companies aren't going to be interested in a technology that makes their fuel costs double or triple.

[–] Lazz45@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hydrogen is going to become more commercially available with it being pushed into the steel industry. It is being trialed for direct injection into blast furnaces in order to reduce carbon emissions, and so far it has been going well. It will need more active supply to make an impact, amd that is already in the works.

Source: I work for a steel company who is trialing this currently, and hydrogen providers are stepping up their infrastructure as we speak

[–] zurohki@aussie.zone 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're actually using the hydrogen instead of inefficiently turning it into electricity and driving electric vehicles with it, so I'm not sure why you thought this was relevant to bring up in a discussion about hydrogen fuel cell vehicles.

[–] Eheran@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Completely correct observation. 70 % conversion of electricity to hydrogen 50 % loss for storage 70 % conversion back to electricity = 0.70.50.7 = 25 % efficiency. Absolutely abysmally low. Unless there is a lot of renewable in the electricity mix, it is even worse than ICE!