Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by anthonyskipper | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

anthonyskipper

Because they wanted hydrogen, not electric.

View on HN

Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are electric vehicles.

Just not very practical ones.

No, they're natural gas vehicles.

They use hydrogen to produce electricity in a fuel cell, so are by definition, electric cars. Unlike natural gas which powers a car by combustion.

The hydrogen comes from natural gas.

(It can come from electrolysis, but in practice doesn't)

By that accounting many BEVs aren't electric either.

That’s like saying a diesel-electric train is an electric vehicle because electric motors power the drive wheels. However, this conclusion ignores the fact the electricity is produced by combusting fossil fuel in an onboard generator.

> That’s like saying a diesel-electric train is an electric vehicle because electric motors power the drive wheels.

...and nuclear submarines are just IP69 steam locomotives :)

Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles do not combust the hydrogen. A fuel cell converts chemical energy to electricity. Batteries also convert chemical energy to electricity.

I think technically the process of oxidizing the hydrogen into H2O IS combustion hah

No. There is no step where heat is an intermediate step. If you relax the definition of combustion that much, even batteries are combusting inside them.

Wait that means I'm combusting, right now! Oh no.

Yeah this thread went off the rails lol. Oops.

Remember that we're focused on mainly on climate impact here, not whether electricity is involved per se as an energy conduit or storage form.

The hydrogen used to fuel an FCV has to come from somewhere, and hydrogen is generally produced from hydrocarbons using the catalytic steam-hydrocarbon process. This typically uses fossil fuels like natural gas or methane as an input, and produces CO2 as a byproduct alongside the H2.

Compare with BEVs, where the energy used to power the motors can come from clean solar, wind, nuclear, or geothermal generation, without creating (as much) CO2 byproduct. (Yes, there are CO2 byproducts of producing power plants, but the goal is to minimize excess CO2 production, not eliminate it entirely.)

> Remember that we're focused on mainly on climate impact here

No. We're focused on whether or not hydrogen FCEVs are electric vehicles, which they are.

> Compare with BEVs, where the energy used to power the motors can come from clean solar, wind, nuclear, or geothermal generation

It can also come from coal and diesel and natural gas. None of this is relevant to whether or not FCEVs are electric vehicles.

> No. We're focused on whether or not hydrogen FCEVs are electric vehicles, which they are.

The root of this thread was about geopolitical issues, mining, and fossil fuels. It got sidetracked into a puerile squabble about what mechanism makes the wheels turn.

You've lost focus. FCEVs are electric vehicles. Admit to that and be happy.

I’ll stipulate that a FCV has an electric powertrain. But so what? An electric powertrain is orthogonal to the source of its fuel and its climate impact. That’s what matters to society. Let’s not ignore the forest for the trees here.

The "so what" is that you were making a false equivalence between diesel engines and hydrogen fuel cells.

But you've made some progress so that's good.

I bet you're a lot of fun at parties.

You're right, I am.

Hydrogen is literally identical to electricity in this regard. It is as green as it's energy source.

No combustion happens in a fuel cell. It is literally an electric car in the absolute sense of the word.

They also don't actually exist in any numbers that actually matters in the real world.

What a bizarre thing to say.

No its not. A technology that has existed since the 70s. Had major, major supports from government, specially Japan. And yet the largest car company in the world can't sell more then a few 1000s. Its embracing failure on every level.

So when people in the real world say 'electric' they are of course referring to BEV because those are getting sold in the millions and you see them every day, while hydrogen electric is a basically a fantasy thing that 99.9% of people have never even seen.

So the smart as response of 'hydrogen vehicles are electric' is a typical "your not wrong but nobody will want to talk to you at parties" response.

> No its not.

Yes, it is.

> while hydrogen electric is a basically a fantasy thing

No, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are practical realities.

Planes: https://labusinessjournal.com/transportation/aviation/univer...

Trains: https://newatlas.com/transport/china-hydrogen-supercapacitor...

Automobiles: https://www.greencarcongress.com/2023/02/20230219-solaris.ht...

You literally don't have a argument against what I sad so you went to the lowest level form of argument, taking a part of what I wrote, then deliberately misinterpreted it away from its context.

You are clearly arguing in bad faith. Bye.

What you said is completely false. There's nothing to argue against.

You're emotional. Take a rest.

The type of fuel cell car that existed in the 1970s were basically undrivable. The first actually usable hydrogen fuel cell car only existed in the last decade.

You're reasoning is the same as all of the wildly short-sighted rhetoric of any burgeoning field. Something that mirrors nearly all green energy developments, including wind, solar, electric cars, etc.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com