That's exactly what the engineers that designed the engine bay of the 300ZX said. As a guy who works on my car from home with only basic hand tools... CURSE YOU NISSAN!
Electric cars already exist. At that speed, the tires make quite a bit of noise. However at medium to low speeds, they need speakers to alert people of the oncoming car
@@areadenial2343 we’ve already solved this issue. Only real issue is just not having any infrastructure yet. The problem doesn’t come down to energy to make this stuff. It’s in the air already. The fact is it’s just not mass produced yet. But it’s 10x better than electric. Even just not having to wait to fill up is worth it.
@@georgeburns6512 This is the correct line of thinking. Hydrogen is the most plentiful resource in the observable universe. It literally, like many other amazing breakthroughs, is gatekept by money. All it takes is one eccentric individual with absurd amounts of income (like Musk) to go, "Hm, it would be cool if this thing existed." Edit: Fixed a typo
@@MetaDudeI'm just sayin anyone who's used to being around cars...would expect it, or atleast not have to cover his ears, ive never been in ,or driven something that was too loud..including a 70 challenger,,with headers and straight piped
He’s recycling old content in the RU-vid “shorts” format, b/c RU-vid is really pushing their content creators to publish shorts videos. Even though the shorts format sucks in my opinion. But, he must’ve made a mistake, b/c RU-vid doesn’t recognize this as a short, LOL.
The people who live on higher traffic roads would be happier. the people who live in neighbourhoods that tend to have a lot of idio- I mean, drivers who like to 'tap the pedal' a bit more, would be happy. The only place, really, where the noise should be kept is in racing, because the 'atmosphere' of it. also why fuel cells make more sense than ICE engines everywhere else, both 'atmosphere' and the goddamn atmosphere.
@@AlMcpherson79 Water is also a far more potent greenhouse gas and weather disruptor than most any greenhouse gas... It is mediated by the water cycle so it won't increase the temperature... Globally. You can capture the water in theory and cool it down. Not sure if anybody is doing that yet.
I loved my steam car. It made noises and VIBRATED too. It was way batter than those fancy new petro cars! 😂 Don’t bother with fuel cells if an EV will do the job. 🎉
What he fails to miserably mention is that the world is being trashed but the real issue is “car is no loud :(“. This comes from someone who loves loud combustion engines btw but I’m not insane
I mean, the same is true of any ICE car. For a given energy amount storing hydrogen isn't much less safe than gas (you're not just storing it like how a rocket would afterall). But if you're using a fuel cell you don't need to store as much energy as you would with gas. So overall in terms of uncontrolled energy release, gas is actually quite a bit worse, actually it's worse than EVs too, it's just we're used to and accept that we sit on gallons of gas every day. With EV batteries, it's funny, dramatic, and still novel when an EV battery goes up. Look up the stats of EV fires vs gas ICE fires though (obviously corrected for % of population of fires) and you'll wonder how an earth we still use gas for anything.
there is one guy like that near my home. he always rev his engine no matter what time it is. before going to wherever he goes. he even remove the silencer for more noise.
@@thedespoiler dang that’s unfortunate, I LOVE engines but there’s a time and place and EXCESSIVE is definitely a thing. I apologize for your neighbor lol.
10% of ppl drive cars because of Loud Noises. The rest of us just want to go from Point A to Point B. Thats it. Of course, as cheap and as fast as possible.
Waaay less then 10%. cars where never made for car people( a few models are. but compaired to all cars, its nothing) All cars are made for going to a to b for normal people
Not everybody is so close to primates, that they like the sound of engines. Some more sophisticated people like silence around them, especially when they are driving.
There’s still the issue of storage and production that would almost certainly have not caught up anyway. It’s extremely expensive to make and then you lose a ton when you store it for any period of time. The hydrogen atoms themselves are so small, they can literally squeeze between the atoms of the container and make their way out. There would be so many inefficiencies in the supply chain and then in your own personal storage (better use up that gas before it literally leaves your tank) that it’s just not worth it. At least until magical technology fixes all energy demands and provides unheard of materials.
@@jlight7346 what production? hydrogen is three times the combustion force of gasoline 1/3 the heat the ONLY byproduct of hydrogen is STEAM...which means you DON'T need an Exhaust or Intake...it also takes nothing more than a 9 volt battery to Make Hydrogen and Oxygen.. storage is simple Essentially Acetylene fuel is a close cousin to it.. which is Coke ash and water ... So a fuel with more Explosive force than gasoline, 1/3 the Heat and 2/3 of the planet that is 100 % renewable and clean? We learned to make hydrogen in 5th grade chemistry class, so don't bother trying to deny it . The ONLY reason the" Science " dogma says it's inefficient is that BTU is the only measurement of fuel efficiency...which is Idiocy... SOUNDWAVE energy composes 70% of ALL mechanical motion rifle round, piston rocket 🚀 etc
@@mjolnirswrath23you fail to consider hydrogen has a very small fraction of the energy density gasoline has, and needs very special containment vessels.
What people don’t seem to realize is a car enthusiast who loves the sound of engines typically doesn’t care if it’s only half as efficient as the other option
Anything you take,anything,there are more common people than enthusiast..any thing..so to use less efficient engine and then maintaining it with oil and regular maintenance is not everyone's cup of tea..
hydrogen engines don't make any sense. why? because where are you going to get the energy to produce hydrogen? also hydrogen is notoriously difficult to store
@@nandansho "Oh the humanity of it . . . " Bob Lazar's system put the hydrogen into hydrides for storage. You could shoot the fuel tank and it just smouldered. He used Lithium-6 for storage and that stuff is heavily controlled and stupidly expensive. Google "Castle Bravo" to see why, but in short it's the fuel for the secondary stage of a thermonuclear bomb. He is still alive after talking about area 51 and making a hydrogen fuel setup for a car.
i am a car guy, even working at a car company and tbh.. i like silent cars. driving my model 3 performance and hearing all the loud engines reving up while producing less power feels like a screaming kid to me. you dont take it serious
@@scojo6377 I am just joking it's something that naturally happened occasionally because we need to prioritize certain things and compromise others and because we don't always know what people exactly want
@@colla555 yeah, but then you have to split off hydrogen again to remake the fuel. So that's usually an electrical process... So you gotta generate electric. This is my issue with hydrogen fuel, it gets less attractive when you try to make it... Makes it feel like an apocalypse alternative when you can't mine/drill for traditional fuel.
@@rareram what you describe is making eFuel from hydrogen. What I was referring to was the burning so to say of the hydrogen itself. (Toyota has recently shown this in a one off Yaris race car)
@@colla555 I was referring to electrolysis to create HHO gas where you can then combust the gas again as you described. Not the fuel cell system. Regardless, they are both very power hungry to produce. If we were in space amd scooped it up, that's totally different since the production aspect is almost free.
Don't know why you feel that way and I'm studying engineering.... Our profs make us go through hell for every little detail in order to satisfy everything a "client" need, mechanical engineering.
My car is also potentially fun and gets 16mpg, but when I'm commuting 120 miles a day through city traffic, nothing is fun. I may as well be in a Prius.
@@nothingsurprisesmeanymore my bone stock citroen c2 was getting mid 50s (best was 76 on a slow 40mph journey with lots of engine off coasting). The economy is slightly worse now because of things like problems with a high idle on start up while moving, a cylinder that sometimes doesn't fire if I'm a bit sudden on the accelerator, and also one of the brakes makes a squeaky sound even if I'm not pressing it so I'm wondering how much the pad is rubbing and wasting fuel. That and occasionally bombing back from work at 70 to 80 mph. Note: UK gallons are 20% larger although we buy fuel in litres so in this hodge podge of metric and imperial mixing I get 11 to 12 miles per litre.
@@nothingsurprisesmeanymore couple reasons, Europeans buy smaller cars, for example the best selling vehicles in US are full size trucks. US on average has higher speed limits therefore more fuel used. Also, even similar size cars have smaller displacements than in US. Back when I had a Mazda 6, I was surprised to learn that you had a 1.6L option while we only had 2.4 and 3.0.
The biggest selling point to a hydrogen fuel engine as opposed to a hydrogen fuel cell, is that a regular combustion engine can be directly converted to hydrogen with minimal modification. Where a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle is basically a BEV with extra steps.
Lol I mean electric isn't bad, it is pretty exciting to see how it develops in the future with already crazy mindblowing powerful cars like the Sapphire & PLAID. I don't actually mind electric 😛😛 ⚡⚡
@@theweeknd2725 hydrogen cars can work with electric motors so the hydrogen generator can be used instead of a battery. some prototypes have removables/replaceble hydrogen tanks easy to fill up/replace with way longer range.
One of the challenges engineers have been grappling with for years is fuel cells in freezing cold environments: water vapor emissions tend to condense, freeze, expand, and break the fuel cells.
@@AlRoderick they would have been in a temperature controlled operating environment with no opportunity to get below freezing, and they were probably operating more or less continuously. Cars do not have that continuous duty cycle. You'd have to leave it running and expending fuel 24/7 and forcing the exhaust to continuously flow without condensing in the cells.
I heard that the the Mirai had no problems in super cold conditions where they tested it in Yellowknife for quite a while. I wouldn't be surprised if there were cold-temp. issues with fuel cells, and I had even heard myself that there were, but perhaps Toyota dealt with it somehow. Or maybe it just wasn't there for long enough.
@@darkninja9499 not sure they will be too interested in me as much as i used to build hydrogen fuel cells. Its pretty common tech now. But since that guy who made his own hydrogen car a few years ago died everyone thinks its the cia despite the fact that Toyota brought a hydrogen fuelled car into the us long before that random guy made one
Honestly having a vehicle as quiet as possible is something i would consider when buying. Being able to use the vehicle for hunting and driving around the countryside i want to hear the sounds of nature not brainnumbing revving. The quieter the vehicle the better
Manual transmissions are slower and less efficient but people still buy them. If hydrogen engines allow enthusiasts to keep enjoying the sounds, vibrations, and mechanical feel of gas cars while reducing emissions, then that’s a big win.
Historically speaking manual transmissions were typically the faster and more efficient option up until about a decade ago when conventionally available transmission technology began to peak. :)
I'm enjoying 37 mpg and reliability with my manual. And my repairs are cheap. I had 2 other automatics and this is by far my most reliable and enjoyable car 😊
from my exp, autos are more convenient for driving but i absolutely hate them when it comes to repair. those valve channels get clogged up and causes solenoid problems. in most cases the tranny needs to be rebuilt. a manual tranny is easier to diagnose and repair bc its a more simpler mechanical design.
Hydrogen cars could make a big bang. Hydrogen is the rocket fuel with the highest specific impulse and the hardest to contain. So unfortunately the bangs may not be coming from the engine compartment.
I don't understand why EV sprtscar makers aren't partnering up with musical artists to create the coolest software to run on their cars. Imagine having timpani drums crashing whenever you shift gears, or the sound of rumbling thunder when you start to push at the throttle...or maybe Aphex Twin, or Squarepusher, or Timbaland, or Pharrell, someone like that, creates a really cool acceleration sound that gets distorted in a cool way when by the driver turning the steering wheel, maybe it changes chords, or changes key...and maybe the acceleration sound gets distorted or added to in another, different way when the driver brakes.... There are so many possibilities. You could have a classical EV software, that plays low bass string notes together when you accelerate, and stays there for a while after you let off the throttle, and big drum clashes when you brake. You could have one for metal heads, or classic rock fans, you could have completely unmusical ones that are just about making the coolest, most futuristic noises for your EV. But no, we just get the electric whine. That's it.
@Gol Acheron So I misspoke slightly. It’s a deflagration, not a detonation. Whatever. Plenty of bullets rely on deflagration and are still loud as heck. Combustion and explosion are not a binary pair either. They’re the same thing but on different timescales with plenty falling between the two extremes. I’d say it’s fast enough to be an explosion. If you saw it right in front of you with nothing between you and the rapidly expanding pocket of gas, you’d probably say it was an explosion too.
Look man, I'm a car guy and I love the sounds of engines. But I'd prefer that the majority of people used cleaner cars even if they have no good sound. Environment it's more important and if most cars don't contaminate as much, those of us who enjoy ic cars would enjoy with no regret
People having to go to school or work by bike on the sidewalk will not be too happy when they have to cross a street at which you can't see around the corner and then get hit by a car
Most road noise today has nothing to do with engines, it's the roar of tires on the pavement that people hear. Aside from the occasional loud-piped sports car or a big diesel truck engine braking, you mostly hear tire roar. Electric cars aren't going to change any of that.
The man who makes a hydrogen powered car thats better than electrical power and internal combustion, that makes noise, will be the richest man in the world
That still wouldn't make hydrogen cars make sense, but they would MAKE DOLLAZ THO, YO. Just like electric, still doesn't make sense, but makes dollaz yo. Until the charging stations just swap the batteries, and the price of replacing the old depleted batteries is factored into the charging costs, everyone will always be waiting 20-30 minutes to charge every 200-300 miles on road trips, and charging far more often as their batteries approach 10 years old, and will be lucky if they last 10 years to begin with. Nobody ever advertises the downsides of electric vehicles, most especially not the "news" whose whole business is supposed to be "keeping people informed". The whole system could be better, but the media and the politicians don't want to point out ANY of the drawbacks or ANY of the ways it SHOULD work, because they're too busy propagandizing the whole thing to get voters to believe mandating electric vehicles "because of climate change" is a great idea. They never point out how much it hurts the environment to extract all the various rare metals it takes to make batteries that only last 10 years. They never point out that all the waste batteries DON'T get recycled, because it costs far more than making new batteries, thus they're "stored" as toxic waste. They also don't want to use nuclear energy for electricity even though it's extremely safe and cost effective. The very few nuclear power plants that have become unsafe were built many decades ago. The people who claim they want to save the plant from greenhouse gasses are literally forcing false solutions that literally don't help in the long run. Why? Because it's all about creating "voting issues" for politicians to exploit to get elected and gain power, to enrich the businesses that support them. The left voters think only the right does that, and the right voters think it isn't as bad as people say.. but BOTH sides work like that. Every election is a war between various businesses, and we all pay the price by believing propaganda and not doing research. It's time for everyone to do their own research and not be so biased that they just disregard facts because they don't WANT to believe those facts.
The thing is. Loud noises usually come out of a sports car or something like that. And those are NOT economical, but that’s a compromise a lot of people are willing to make. So why not just put non economical hydrogen combustion engines in sports cars. And put fuel cells in grocery getters. That way everyone is happy.
Fr 💀🤣🤣🤣Fr. 😂😂😂💀💀I love the sounds of engines at times, but hearing loud vehicles over and over, without much break, like I often do living in a city, isn't fun. Especially not fun when most drivers are as*holes that honk when people are at red lights, cut each other off, burn more gas by speeding illegally and for no good reason and complain about it (especially odd as non-vegans, consuming the most oil, making the most deforestation, and making the most pollution in the world, on scientific record). ;P Japan has had someone who developed water engines, but it gets hushed because of corrupt politics (especially in America, where the Founding Fathers were against political parties, and now there's a two-party puppet system, amongst cancerous, unoriginallll, and debunked Christianity they openly spoke against as fellow Deists, and the fake "Federal" Reserve that's been extra cancerous to the world since 1914, especially 1933). Nikola Tesla had a self running engine even, and yet, the news really didn't cover it much at all because it hurt people like Edison (who cheated him out of money by not paying for the AC electricity system he revolutionised, burning down his lab, killing his friend, etc.), JP Morgan, the infamous US government, etc. Too many personal vehicles too. Elon Musk has even noted that most vehicles stay parked for 90-95% of the day. All these ugly and too large of parking lots. The extra costs in finances, pollution, accidents and deaths, massively destroying resources, etc. I was born and raised in infamous Miami, FL, USA, and it's typically rated the worst drivers of America, and rudest people of America, has a horrible bus system, metrorail is only on the east side, gridlocks are common, overly expensive (considered the most expensive city in America rn in 2023k, a ton of littering, drug capital, big bias against English, and so forth, and thankfully I left there, FL, and the USA too. :3
Yeah, I want to hear the full noise of the engine without the muffler messing with the sound, and I want to feel it in my chest, but I also want to be able to hear tomorrow. If anything knocks out my hearing it'll be the orchestra.
There’s a reason why hydrogen combustion is still being considered: Fuel cells have much stricter requirements on purity than combustion engines. The purification costs money and energy.
Not really. Hydrogen extraction already yanks out hydrogen out. Electrolysis already separates the hydrogen through some chemical mumbo jumbo that I do not know how to explain to a layman.
fuel cells don't emit nitrogen oxides, which are created with every combustion engine, because of the nitrogen in the air. also nitrogen oxides are harder to get rid of than co2
@Woodworking and Epoxy...research the security guard that was shot and killed in the Buffalo New York mass shooting......his hobby was building these type of engines...
Thank you so much for mentioning this, and he was a man of color so I think it’s very strange “they’re” talking about making Hydrogen combustion engines now. One thing I’ll say is this government is very very insidious. To say the least.😡🤦🏿 to all the beautiful people out there with great innovuatative mindset’s, no matter your ethnicity, or race keep your inventions and ideas to yourself. Until you know you can truly protect your invention in a way that no one can kill you, Or take your idea or invention, not even the government. Be safe out there loves.❤ We can’t let no machine steal our shine
cars that run on hydrogen already exist, but it makes no sense to do that since electricity is just better than breaking up water molecules for hydrogen cells
@@Brzzzyexe yes, but for people that live in places where they cant charge their car, hydrogen is a better choice. also, hydrogen is better for people that want to do long distance driving as it takes the same amount of time as fuelling up a current car compared to having to wait for a charger to charge the car
@@alexford5291Plus, the technology's improvement over time depends on how ubiquitous it is. Need to use the product to really know how to make it better.
At some point a dude made a fully water powered car and like a week later the car was stolen, he was dead, his office was wrecked, and nothing was left of the blueprints
Hydrogen combustion makes total sense for car people. We usually don't care about efficiency or cost. It is basically a combustion engine that's legal after they ban gas. No real downside here.
I was thinking this during the short, if you want to really hammer your car for the fun of it with an ICE you aren’t thinking about mpg. Hydrogen ICEs are the best way to keep that type of engine feel in our ecosystem without relying on oil.
I think a lot care about efficiency or cost and/or emissions- at least for anyone who cares to use hydrogen or battery tech over fossil fuels. Why go for hydrogen when you could just have petrol or fuel cell? In fact as far as I understand hydrogen combustion performance is also quite bad and yet expensive and more complicated; and still produces a lot of harmful nitrogen oxides waste emissions. EngineeringExplained has a video all about it. Probably what he's referencing in this short.
@@MsHojat burning hydrogen has its problems like the mentioned nox emissions or the fuel attacking parts of the motor. Besides that hydrogen actually runs really well on standard engine blocks with a small amount of modifications. Also "not caring" will become impossible or expensive. For example in the EU fossil fuels are banned from 2035 onwards. That means the only fuel you are allowed to use is fuel made from plants or ethanol from combining hydrogen with co2. hydrogen will most likely be a lot cheaper then the other options then. Hydrogen combustion is the only maintainable future for combustion motor sports and enthusiasts. When the first production cars with hydrogen combustion are available and the scene is more familiar with the tech I'm sure it's only a matter of time when we see supra's with hydrogen swaps etc. Based on the physics of hydrogen combustion compared to patrol it will likely be even more performant.
If government bans gas they choose to attempt to win a revolution against their country's population. Our government would be abolished and replaced by the same oil and gas monopoly that murdered the last "water powered" engine and the gun lobbys connections are more than capable of arming the masses(who are already armed).
In 2035 your gonna see the people ban the politicians that are banning what works! When the other junk actually works then they won’t need to ban anything, idiots with hidden motivations are pushing for the destruction of what works!
I always get frustrated when people say hydrogen combustion only produces water because H2+02->H2O, which would only be true if you had a tank of pure O2 on board as well. In reality, you probably use atmospheric air for the combustion which contains nitrogen so you still end up producing a lot of NOx. Hydrogen fuel cells only produce water byproducts though I believe. Correct me if I'm wrong.
hydrogen combustion only produces water. hydrogen combustion in a context where it creates enough heat and pressure will also create nitrogen oxide, as far as I'm reading. It's less of a situation where hydrogen combustion creates anything, and more that it's a natural by-product of any engine burning any fuel because there's hot air and pressure involved. still a concern, but still dramatically better for everyone compared to gas cars, and if they actually lead to the elimination of gas in things like large trucks or across country road trips, far better than batteries, especially if used in airplanes
best balance is everyday electric hydrogen or battery range for evereday use, then freepiston combustion like intelline or sir joseph etc. so its more effceint than big battery car, combustion is used for high power tasks like once ina while long trips and trips with lot of heavy load being carried, towed etc. more weight worsens road wear damage, tires brakes battery degradation wear damage. tax heaviness in car. rear seat facing rear, some lotus elise weight distrubution and driving fun focus for hypermiling ie. acclerating braking steering minimally and steadily, building car momentum on downwhills and before uphills, pushing power more closer most effceint rpm according to BFSC graph of engine... like by marketing and a reminder in infotainment every time cars turned on. easily removable drivetrain and anti NoiseVibrationHarshness materials to allow more optimal effiency and cheap repairs and updates, staying relevent if e fuels beat other energy holding tech, or if hydrogen cassete and grey paste stuff becomes worthy, new fully recylable battery etc.
It gets worse. The NOx comes from the high-temperature combustion, but 3-way catalytic converters require carbon or carbon oxides in the exhaust to reduce the NOx back to N2, generating CO2 So hydrogen combustion engines are only cleaner wrt particulates and carbon monoxide. They still spew out ozone- and smog-generating oxides of nitrogen in mass quantities. A whole new clean-up process is required to scrub the exhaust if you want them to be carbon-neutral and not contribute to photochemical smog (the brown stuff). By the way, the high-temperature contact with the nitrogen-oxygen atmosphere is all that is required to make NOx. Rocket engines working in the atmosphere also generate NOx even though they carry along their own pure O2. The edges of the exhaust plume are hot enough to dissociate the N2 and allow it to react with free oxygen.
@@lukasyan4818 F1 is going completely synthetic fuel. So no matter what its going to be produced, whether its used in production cars, we dont know. But if its affordable, it no doubt will be used, cuz it would save emissions more than EVs due to less emissions produced on the production line. Plus it would keep car people happy.
@@BadBoyV1 sure, but I'm talking about energy efficiency. Efficiency from the start of the production to being used in the engine. For a sport, it does not matter as much. But if you have any dreams of it being a consumer product then it has to be relatively on par with other options or it will have no chance.
It's still new technology. It's just a matter of time untill they will be as efficiant as normal engines. First gas engines were also less efficiant than today's engines.
@@burh2 No it can't. You can split it into hydrogen and oxygen, but that costs more energy than what you get back from using it. Name a single water engine with independent tests proving that it works.
@@burh2 Can't find anything about it. Again, hydrolysis takes more energy than what you get back from using the resulting hydrogen. So how did it make the hydrogen?
Man just casually ignores the fact that one of the major problems with hydrogen cars is major corrosion from the hydrogen. Or the fact that any minor accident could end in a massive fireball
Wrong. Electric cars don't make sense. It doesn't matter about efficiency whatsoever. Centralized nuclear power facilities could solve that issue and drop the cost per mile easily at the same time. There is literally no reason to do anything other than hydrogen combustion, unless you want to poison African children as your goal.
@@mileswithau all of this is utter nonsense compared to the fact you can generate hydrogen fuel for almost net zero and it's merely a political issue they refuse to allow us the nuclear power
Agreed, vroom vroom. But at this point I will settle for anything that isnt an EV with a short fixed lifespan, a structurally integrated battery, and useless subscription services.
If those engines aren’t harmful to the environment, then hydrogen and electric are the future. We might have to renovate old cars and make them a hydrogen.
Electric cars are still harmful, not when they are driving, but when people mine lithium, which is harmful to the environment. Plus, you can't recycle batteries, unlike engine blocks, which you can just melt and form inti different things, like tables, stand, doors, etc
We can't exactly renovate old car and fit them with hydrogen , engines for examples needs to be reinforced and have very low tolarance, and even then due to the low volumetric energy density of hydrogen , and tanks requirements you need 7 times the space of what would be needed with a gasoline tank for the same range.
No, if you and I are thinking of the same person, I believe his claim was that he had water powered cars, which to me, sounds like absolute bs, if it was actually hydrogen, then it makes more sense
You can have a combustion engine and a fuel cell in the same car. Fuel cells produce power slowly and combustion is direct delivery. The main issue with hydrogen is that it takes more power to make the fuel than you get out of it.
That's the problem with any fuel. You put more into it then you get out of it. Some processes take millions of years too. But many other short cycle fuels exist too with the same problem. Growing corn, mashing it, making alcohol, distilling. A looooot of energy. Roughly 8 KWh to make one liter of ethanol, which in turn gives you about 6KWh of energy. And it take a lot of land and time to grow the required corn. Methane is even worse, because the input is H2 and you need a double power to gas conversion to make it into methane. Although it is more efficient for storage and power delivery. Pumping and converting oil is more efficient, but still requires about a 1:1 ratio of energy required to create said energy. Just because nature put the oil into the ground doesn't mean you can just take it without consequence or thought. It comes with a price. Oil is the most efficient in terms of availability, concentration and the fact we don't have to wait for the natural processes anymore.
Well that's the issue with electric cars too, normal combustion is fairly inefficient because you lose a lot of energy to heat. From memory I think like 34% efficiency for combustion. Electric they put at around 96% because of losses in energy through the grid but the number never really takes into account producing the electricity in the first place. If your city sources electricity from a coal power station its thermal efficiency is around 32%. So, in that city, an energy vs. energy comparison would make petrol cars 34% efficient and electric cars 30.08% efficient.
@@craigseddon4884 except coal only accounts for about 20% of electrical generation in the U.S., the same as nuclear. The largest single energy source for electrical generation is actually natural gas with thermal efficiencies around 50%. Then you have renewables, which account for about 20% of total energy production.
Water is an extremely stable element, it takes around 4 times the energy to recover the hydrogen as you get back from using it. Really bad solution. Because of this hydrogen is industrially produced by breaking down hydrocarbons (usually natural gas), not so clean then…. Batteries are currently the best way to move a vehicle, which is why most of the industry is going that way.
@@davidkerr4103Has lithium mining gotten better in the last decade? To me, it seems more like a political issue since they are giving out incentives to car companies to make electric cars. I don't think that the battery powered cars are the way to go just yet if it's the environment we are trying to protect, when lithium mining is typically very destructive....on top of most power plants are coal based. This essentially means battery cars run off of coal. Basically, we need better and more sustainable battery creation/energy storage. Then look at our power grid. I'm not saying that we can't upgrade that, but California has rolling blackouts, and Chicago has harsh winters that can shock the grids and leave EV people stranded and possibly die from hypothermia after the cold saps the energy out of the batteries. We aren't yet capable of using EVs in mass and the government pushing us towards it with no plan is not going to be a good situation to be in, especially if it ends up not being a good idea in the long run. You can't just make everyone switch to EVs when not everyone or everything is ready for it. Plus, the government is never your friend. It's very worrisome that they are pushing this idea to begin with and we shouldn't be so accepting of it. If it wasn't our government, but instead people doing it amonst themselves/within their company's, then maybe. It depends.
Just wait till people learn about how & what energy transfer is... IF you could make a V12 engine run as quiet as an electric cart from Walmart, without adding additional energy into it for sound dampening, it would be way more efficient. Same works in reverse, take an electric car and use its energy to make it louder, and it will be less efficient!
Most flawless logic I’ve ever seen in a short that really touches on the practical challenges facing hydrogen cars today. “Hey Siri, play ‘loud douchey car noises’”
There is nothing that I enjoy more than sitting outside at a restaurant in a quaint tourist town and having the peace and quiet disrupted by the loud exhaust sounds of passing vehicles. The absolute best are modified Harley motorcycles with straight pipes.
The vast majority of people within earshot absolutely despise the owner of that loud ass vehicle when they pass, even if they love high horsepower cars under other circumstances. This youtuber probably lives in his dad's garage around other people with catatonic ADHD.
The Shelby GT is basically considered the god of American cars It is also the most unforgivingly obnoxiously loud stock car I've ever heard and I wish my neighbor's engine would explode every time he starts it...the dude drives it out on short trips like 7 times a day from morning past midnight, I can hear him for a couple minutes after he leaves it's so damn loud. Jars me out of my sleep, drowns out everything I'm doing when I'm awake I love the sound of a good engine myself, but there is definitely a line between sounding beastly and just straight up annoyingly loud for no reason than to be very loud
Tell him to get some sample noise and play through the speakers so he gets the full effect but in a more reasonable car then he can take the shelby to a track where he can open it up away from residential streets. Like if i can hear your vehicle a mile away when you open it up on the highway then your car is too loud. Doesn’t help im a couple hundred feet from a nice river and dude like to zip back and forth full throttle in their v8 speed boats. Sounds like im at a race track just sitting in my house. Not sure if they dump exhaust straight out the engines or if they have to have some kind other dampening exhaust. Sounds like straight dump.
Hes just one obnoxious guy. Petrolheads should be allowed to enjoy these things without the few obnoxious ones ruining their image and taking it from them.
Now i feel bad😂😂 I have a Chevy Impala that I've done an engine swap with, but i recently got it cammed. I go to work very early so im sure my neighbors are gonna hate me soon😂😂
impossible to combine both things, the only properly clean way of making hydrogen is electrolysis, which is the anti-definition of cheap. you can't have both. Unless you go full nuclear, because nuclear reactors produce free hydrogen as a side-effect, which is just burned because its a byproduct of neutron absorption by water.
Yeah but a wintertime pile up you're going to have gasoline cars setting on fire amongst all the electrical fires on the wet ground and hydrogen cars randomly blowing up straight out of a GTA chain reaction. The fire department shows up and they just quit their jobs on the spot and we're screwed. Ambulances, lots of bodies. Mangled old and young and everyone inbetween. Closed casket funerals ECT
It’s really not looking that way. Fuel cells have had problems with cost and longevity.. plus making hydrogen has not seen massive efficiency gains in production that it needs.
@@GreenBlueWalkthrough Hydrogen combustion engines do NOT exclusively produce water as a byproduct. Air contains carbon dioxide and nitrogen. In the combustion chamber, those gases get turned into the bad stuff that catalytic converters turn into not-so-bad stuff. Hydrogen cars would still need a cat.
If you burn hydrogen and pure oxygen, you get water vapor as it's exhaust. But oxygen comprises only 22% of the air, with the rest primarily nitrogen (77%). Burning hydrogen with air results in large amounts of various nitrogen oxides, which are pollutants. Also, hydrogen has a lower efficiency as compared to gas engines when used in a IC engine. Compare this to a fuel cell, which can attain an efficiency of over 90%.
A conversion kit? Ehhh - you do understand that absolutely nothing from an existing engine can be reused, right? Your fuel is pressurized to either 350 or 700 bar (propane gas is pressurized to around 35 bar), so the entire fuel system up to and including the injection valve would blow up instantly.
As a car guy I do love my engine noises. But I love the convenience of being able to stop at the gas station and be back on the road in under 10min during travel more. I'm okay with fuel cells as long as I can stop, fill my tank and be back on the road without waiting in line at a charge station or wait at a charge station period. Much easier transition than going from ICE to full Electric.
@@GinsuChikara There's no denying battery tech is improving but they are still huge and heavy. There's gonna be pros and cons for whatever tec they choose. It'll be interesting to see where it all goes in the long run.
@@GinsuChikara and denying the ultimate convenience of just filling up at home every night with 10 seconds of effort. He also conveniently forgot how it takes close to $1M in very specialized equipment to build a hydrogen station, and how hard liquid hydrogen is to store and transport. Oh, and that 400 miles worth of hydrogen sells for around $140 these days. The way gasoline is going, it might actually catch up to half of that.
@Null Some apartment buildings have charging stations. I do a lot of field service work and I see charge stations all over the place at apartment buildings. My ex wife's apartment complex has chargers too.
@@erichtisnado1536 Your retort about charging every night at home is exactly why electric can never be a full suitable replacement. Even in resource rich nations like the US, replacing all ICEs with electric would consume more than a third of the electricity supply, at peak production levels (which aren't at night). And considering that there's typically pretty miniscule differences between production & consumption, a massive switch to electric vehicles would require an equally massive increase in electricity supply. It's just not feasible not realistic, & many scientists are saying that companies like Tesla that have focused solely on electric are holding society back from long term feasible options, like hydrogen fuel cells.
the irony is that you get it, you are becoming more deaf each year that pass, so you basically get less noise regardless. also, the world becomes darker (not metaphorically), buy 200W LED lamps, its your eyes that become less transparent.
@@jimzimprich6969 Very much this. My '71 Riviera 455 was very quiet by virtue of big mufflers and effective resonators. Cops never looked twice. My buddy's '72 Riv was deliberately loud as hell, he got pulled over when he wasn't even speeding. The big punchline was that I won my stoplight drags against him; his extra power didn't overcome my better transmission mods.
Car enthusiasts tend to be somewhat delusional on this topic, while I and most of us love the sound of an engine, the vast majority of consumers want their cars to be as quiet as possible as do most pedestrians.
We’re going to be under 300 feet of water by Valentine’s Day 2025 if the orange meanie wins this November. My TV told me so, and my TV isn’t a liar. You watch Fox News so your TV is a liar and you’re a xenophobic!
As someone who loves cars, I have to say something. There isn't just one kind of car. We have had gasoline, diesel, CNG, LPG, and now electric. We have commuter cars, sports cars, and trucks. Each has it's application. There's absolutely nothing wrong fueling two kinds of vehicles at the same hydrogen fueling station. Instead of destroying the industry, it would make it grow. People don't have to give up their gas cars, they just need to change the fuel system. They get to keep their lumpy exhaust noise, or go silent. This is something we need to move to. It has the potential of having a fast transition, without throwing away all of the gasoline and diesel vehicles on the streets today. It will likely keep the racers happy too, they can test and tune, and make their vruum vruum car go faster than the other guy. If you want a hydrogen fuel cell car, great. If you want a Tesla, and I want a Corvette, great. We can all be happy.
But literally the only advantage of a hydrogen ICE over fuel cell is that the ICE makes noise, that is literally the only advantage. Racers want to go fast, so why would the pick something half as powerful? The test and tune argument is null, as the point of testing and tuning is to increase the thermal efficiency of an ICE. A fuel cell and electric motor system is, by design, already vastly more efficient. Motor control systems can also still be tuned “at the track” - there are hundreds of parameters in a motor control system that can be adjusted. The only case for using hydrogen ICE is the ease of retrofit without having to redesign an entire vehicle. But as Jason has shown in other videos, storing a useful amount of hydrogen in a vehicle really isn’t practical anyway.
But those old engines dont run on hydrogen, at least I don't see how. Making fuel for old engines with power makes no sense because it is even far more inefficient than charging a battery - and therefore more expensive (half the efficiency means double the price, imagine charging a car is 20$ but refueling your gaa car in 10 years would be 200$) I do think we should keep synthetic fuels, but not as something you get at a gasstation, and more something for people to buy to keep their then-vintage cars around for the sake of liking them. As a hobby rather than a mode of transport. We can't keep pumping oils out of the ground for cheap forever. No matter how much you might like a loud sound. Also on thr other side I think if electric cars were the standard, and car people then would have to switch to gasoline aa the new better thing, they'd make fun of how loud and noisy those cars are and that cars have no soul if they dont silently glide over the asphalt. People are just used to how things are, there will always be something to love, just what to love about the hobby will shift.
@@bluemutt9964 of course it won’t! Most tracks have noise limits which have been coming down for years. If anything EV’s will allow motorsport to take place is more places. Nobody is going to allow a new ICE fuelled drag strip and it’s associated noise to be built near houses, but an almost silent EV based drag strip, nobody is going to even hear it, let alone complain.
@@Pugjamin it really isn’t about noise, it’s about the massive amount of ICE cars already sold, will be sold in the future, and traded for quite some time. We’re asking to upend this industry for one we don’t have infrastructure for, and doesn’t really clean the environment up anyway. If we can find a way to make these existing engines burn something else? Great that’s a lot better short term alternative than “welp… gotta be all EV by 2030”. EVs still have a lot of growing to do.
Depends alot on cost tbh, fuel cells aren't cheap so if you had a really cheap supply of hydrogen you MIGHT be willing to compromise on efficiency. Ultimately there's just too many unknowns for your average consumer to deal with regardless of which storage medium you choose, at least for the time being.
I love stealth, too. Our company got new jackets a few years ago. They're a bit "rustle-y". As I put mine on I quipped, _"How am I supposed to sneak up on anyone in this?"_ The room stopped to absorb what I'd said. And, now, I'm referred to as "the ninja guy". 😂
Unfortunately, that ends up being the sole benefit of fuel cell propulsion. People who buy them to be on the leading edge of the green revolution will be sadly disappointed to find out how the vast majority of hydrogen is produced.
I'm a motorbike guy myself, the engine sound is part of the excitement and feeling of it, and it's what makes a Motorbike a Motorbike, I can't think of anything worse than an electric motorbike, I'd take a hydrogen combustion bike or even a combustion bike that runs on Synthetic fuel instead of fossil, over an electric one anyday 👌🏍️
