🚀 go-pugleaf

"Mr. Precision" <Amaps.news@archeus.plus.com> wrote in message 
news:843342-5dg.ln1@yelm.homenetwork...

>
> And the overall efficiency is substantially worse than a conventional 
> internal combustion engined hybrid. Significant amounts of fuel have to be 
> consumed to generate the hydrogen.

You assume we will always make hydrogen from fossil fuel which is unlikely. 
There are multiple ways being developed to get hydrogen, including direct 
production from solar energy breaking water down into hydrogen and oxygen 
with no intermediate electricity production.

> Fuel which could be used more directly and more efficiently. The only 
> reason hydrogen fuel cells cars are feasible is that the electrical drive 
> is so efficient. If they take that out they are completely missing the 
> point.

Well the experts writing in a feature summary article in Science a few weeks 
ago disagree with you.


> And anyway, at 420 Wh/kg new generation lithium ion batteries have a 
> higher energy density than compressed hydrogen so I'm not convinced that 
> fuel cells will take off.

Unless  you can charge them in a few minutes and don't have to charge them 
again for at least 150 or more miles, then it is not a solution.  In Popular 
Science, I think this month, the have long article on batteries and their 
future.   They are unaware of what you are talking about and don't see much 
future for battery advances.

They do talk about the possibility of a zinc (and air?) battery which is old 
but a company has figured out how to make it safe and practical.  It doubles 
the power density that can be stored by other batteries.  No indication it 
would make electric cars practical.