I try LIVING with a HYDROGEN FUEL CELL car... 

😂😂 Totally true!

Saw that part... done with this review.

Gago haha

Immediately scrolled down to the comment section too search for this comment🤣.

You may not do it but they certainly do to the young. for them it is probably quite obvious that a car should offer Spotify 😃 or some other streaming service. and other smart features and they may also want comfortable suspension comfort

Thanks. I love yours too!

I love your videos DDoI! ❤️

Stan myers was right

Daily dose of Internet will you be using a clip from this video?

You know I searched up hydrogen powered car because DDI introduced it in his last vlog then clicked this dudes vlog then checking through his comments then saw DDI commented then wow whatta coincidence hahaha

I would imagine it is bonkers expensive. They’ve not had fuel filling stations for years, hydrogen stations will be much more expensive than those.

Makes sense. Every toyota dealer that sells Mirai will have a community of loyal Mirai costumers for refueling as well. As more people buy these cars, businesses on hydrogen fueling station will start to appear near the area and will be like domino effect.

Good bye Toyota Prius battery generator Hydrogen in use needs no batteries and i like the battery climate control

@@beedee9534 HFC cars still need a battery.

That's what manufacturers should do to help sales. Any location willing/able to put one in would probably help sales huge. If you can fill up where you bought it, you keep going there.

When he said the batteries for EVs are so big but never said that there's 3 massive tanks that take up half the car 😅 theres not much interior space and the cost to fill up is so ridiculous especially here in the states

Fr 😭

I mean he probably made way more then what it cost him to refill

The whole hydrogen Car thing is a scam already

@@Chen-sm1og elaborate

@@Chen-sm1og JCB in the UK, are producing and testing hydrogen powered ice vehicles, and ice add on’s to existing engines already, with zero emissions. So, it isn’t a scam. Check your facts first, before you comment.

A lot of areas took them out like in nyc I have never seen one

What the hell is a locking clip?

We don’t have them in the UK either.

Coming from a family (and me) who works on gas stations, pumps that don't lock are super cheap. They also break alot

@@ragingstormgaming7829 hmm it’s weird honestly. We do have the actual mechanism of clips but they don’t work here. Like they remove the part that locks the clip itself so the clip just moves back and forth

eletric will always win in preformance but range isn't what makes hydrogen so awsome. The BEST part of hydrogen is its BACKWARDS COMPATIBLE with gas cars. Meaning with a ($1000~) kit you could convert any gas car into a hydrogen burning car. This is how we stop consumerism by letting people make their used cars new again. instead of doing what the billionaires want "your 3 year old gas car is inefficient BUY NEW BUY BUY BUY electric but buy new"

@@superspooky4580 Tesla still supports old cars and while sir you can convert an old car, I bought into electric because it’s better overall and Teslas are awesome

@@tylerdingus7053 I agree that electrics are awesome and they are stupidly powerful. BUT I only have a problem with people buying a brand new electric car because “I’m trying to be green and protect the environment”. So many people thinking buying a brand new car loaded with lithium battery’s is some how “saving the environment”

@@superspooky4580 would would help is micro cars with modern efficiency. Ok, that's just an excuse, I just want to see em. I have seen a few that look real cool, most of them look rather funky and ugly but the few that don't look real fun

@@superspooky4580 What, no can't just convert ICE into hydrogen, you are thinking of Biofuel. You can't burn hydrogen in a ICE motor, it simply won't do anything at all. You need to replace the fuel tank, as it needs to be a pressured tank, that can hold hydrogen as it notarius for leaking too. The whole engine then needs to come out, as again it can't burn the fuel at all. You would also need to install a huge battery, as the engine does not convert power at a need basic, it makes energy that is stored in batteries then used by electric motors.

Bahahaha... So true!

Ha....great idea but to be honest a busy UK motorway did a bit of weaving in and out in sport mode. It only kicks out 136HP but the torque is awesome....!!

I truly don't understand your comment. "Hoon"? Save on foods parking lot? I'm in Canada and I don't get it. Keep in mind that km 60 years old! Go easy on me!lol!

Ha!! Joining is something American rally driver Ken Block does. Check him out.....he calls himself a Hoonigan!

Hooning I mean not joining

the hydrogen is created on site through water and electrolysis. the cost is likely the electricity that goes into producing the gas. the price likely depends on electricity price of the area and since there are no other competitors they can charge what they want. the cost of producing the hydrogen should be only a couple of dollars

Correction, Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe, not on Earth.

Hello 30% well-to-wheel effiency...

Welcome to Vancouver where we pay 27% fuel taxes LOL

Wrong, that is oxygen.

Yes but mining 80lbs of lithium for a electric car produces more co2 and kills more child slaves than steam reforming hydrogen. Until lithium is mined off world AND its mined by robots its about as ethical as BLOOD DIAMONDS and polluting as natural gas.

Lithium is 99% recyclable, eventually the majority of new batteries will be sourced from old batteries. Now how many times can you recycle that coal or any other combustible?

@@superspooky4580 you really are brainwashed... guess where all those rare metals from your devices come from...

@@mostneuter I know where it comes from. And I know that by buying a phone or any technology made today I have blood on my hands. But that’s why I have a 8 year old phone. My 100grams of lithium 8 years ago is a little better than 589,000grams of lithium (a very conservative estimate). A Tesla battery weighs 3500lbs and most of that is lithium. So make that 1300kg of lithium. So yeah my 100grams every 8 years vs some peoples new electric car every 3-4 years. And once those battery’s go bad they get trashed.

@@superspooky4580 Why do you keep talking about lithium? Do you really think it's the only metal on earth? Also, if you really think Tesla throw away their batteries, you really need to start doing some research on the subject instead of talking shit :) The only reason why most companies don't recycle their batteries is only because it's cheaper to get new ones, recycling them is already done by some companies at a smaller scale and as it was said previously, lithium is 100% recyclable edit: Tesla also will have in the future an entire area of their Gigafactory dedicated for recycling batteries if i remember well

yeah but while it will give water, it won't give minerals, and demineralized water can make you extremely sick

@@tafftafflecomuniste1857 That's not really the reason. The process is not food safe, so it's not advised to drink it.

The amount of water produced is very minimal or there would be Extremely High Inefficiency and Waste.

I wouldn't want to drink Natural Gas water.

@@jacksonbangs6603did u fail chemistry?

They've been testing fuel cell buses in Vancouver for probably 20 years. See Ballard Power Systems.

I woudn't bet the farm on that. A number of H2 bus operators aren't thrilled now and are likely to be far less thrilled as other battery cost continue to drop at 8% per year or more as they have for some time now. Also "power density" = charge/discharge rate "energy density" = capacity. You don't want to misuse the terms in your paper. The use case for PHEVs is shrinking every year. Busses are already gone. For long haul trucks and ships, I would use Nat Gas as that's already been done and is Far easier and cheaper to get. If Tesla builds out mega chargers, even long haul trucks will fall to EV.

There is a REASON airplanes do to use it...because it is NOT viable.

Especially Shell hydrogen.

Steam is Literally Water in a vapor state, not the same as Separated H & O gases, can't breath Oxygen Directly from water molecules.

@@cranfillnathan7411 We know what steam is, but you don't seem to know that Canada produces its hydrogen from the Alberta oil patch, not electrolysis, as was incorrectly suggested in the video. Hydrogen is a dirty fuel here, because it is the byproduct of natural gas + water + fossil fuel heat = more carbon dioxide + carbon monoxide + hydrogen. Until that changes, you would produce fewer green house gasses operating a gas powered car, than a hydrogen one.

Even from electrolysis it would be bad. There is no surplus of green electricity so most of the time it is coal or gas fired power stations that would need to run to provide extra power to the grid. Does not matter for the climate whether on paper you buy green electricity.

@@DanielKivariTeacher Globally, making hydrogen creates about 800 million tons of CO2, plus fossil fuels are used for heat. Yeah, unfortunately, it really is not "green" like the promoters make out. Hydrogen filling stations cost $2-3 million, and service 10-20 cars a day . Could the money building out the infrastructure be better spent on solar and batteries ?

A Nissan Leaf is not a car. It's a beer can with a battery drill motor.

Solid state batteries, les. Hydrogen, you are joking, aren't you?

Probably wanted a car that doesn't run on fossil fuels whilst getting the most range option as possible

also needs to essentially drive 2x my daily commute to fuel the car instead of just plugging a cable in it in the evening. and thinks rapid charging takes several hours.

@@yvs6663 Agreed

yea thats kinda sad.

@@c.o.1887 the car was made with fossil fuels lol and it's not his only car

Hydrogen fuelling stations are actually closing down.

Good job 👏 😊 Andrew

Well most hydrogen is got as a byproduct of fossil fuels because it’s cheaper.

Welcome aboard!

Your right. Never thought about it that way.

And people who complained about EV long charging time? C’mon you have to stop for breaks and 15-30 mins of changing goes a long way. There’s no need to charge it to 100 percents all the time.

Yes and semi trucks as well,

Semis and construction equipment, do you have any idea how many batteries would be needed

Totally and it produces more power to weight so our semis will be hydrogen in Canada testing right now actually can't get enough batteries to haul a load of logs off a mountain or lumber to the world

@@joeblow1186 Yet the first battery powered freight locomotive has just been sold. It's going to haul mining trains in Australia.

@@joeblow1186 hard agree, HFC tech makes more sense the more you scale up in vehicle size etc

Good bye Toyota Prius battery generator Hydrogen in use needs no batteries and i like the battery climate control

Bam!! I hope Toyota and Lexus fans make hydrogen fuel cell the thing to own

It shall be the other way around. Battery pack is heavy. No so much probelm for commercial viechle, but big probelm for passenger viechle. Hydrogen fuel cell is a goo range extender.

​@@user-jh6vt8vx4v Actually a battery pack is a big negative for commercial vehicles. They are too heavy for commercial vehicles (especially trucks) that have a maximum weight they can carry on roads/highways. Cars are so light that adding the extra weight won't inconvenience the average Joe because the efficiency of an EV is better for non-commercial drivers (they don't have to care about weight restrictions). Commercial vehicles would benefit from hydrogen being way lighter and saving time on fueling up. Thats why Caddyzig is right.

thats what Hyundai is trying to do in Europe. A fleet of hydrogen powered semis trucks

@@user-jh6vt8vx4v Hydrogen doesn't make sense for consumer vehicles (possibly not even most commercial ones either) and pretty much everyone that's not Toyota has learned this.

​@@dylanlong6269 Yea, Semi's with weight restrictions would go Hydro. Aviation that need to have as little weight as possible to fly would go Hydro as well.

Glad you liked it!

Planes will never use hydrogen or electricity to any great extent due to low energy density compared to jet fuel.

Those new short range electric passenger aircrafts they're building are pretty sweet though. Make no noise, can land pretty much anywhere. I see a great future for them.

@@arcosiancosine1065 well okay

@@arcosiancosine1065 maybe for small planes?

thanks grim, china appreciates this info, but will attack on the commercial side, as well, not just buses and trucks

regular EV chargers are already available all over the mid-west and other parts of the USA! Hydrogen does lag behind, but EVs are available now!

you do know that the most commonly used substance to create the hydrogen needed in the massive quantities needed is petroleum

get an EV

Hydrogen is half as efficient to make as bev’s and that is not including how they hold it. And hydrogen is usually made with byproducts of fossil fuels as it is cheaper, why do you think the fossil fuel industry is supporting hydrogen so much?

@@HarrisonAdAstra its worse than half. Electric cars use 100% of the available energy. Hydrogen is lucky to get 35% efficiency.

Good bye Toyota Prius battery generator Hydrogen in use needs no batteries and i like the battery climate control

Except for the process of creating, (by electrolysis or methane re-forming), compressing, building storage and transportation infrastructure , transportation to refill sites, storage and dispensing of the pressurized hydrogen. Battery electric cars (BEV and PHEV) use existing infrastructure (just like fueled cars have with refineries and gas stations) for home charging and in practice use the energy more efficiently.

Yes, but that is not a vehicle issue but an infrastucture one. If you had no petrol stations outside Vancouver would you be able to drive an internal combustion vehicle outside the city? No, you would not. So why criticise a vehicle for the currentl lack of infrastructure? The infrastructure is never going to be built if the vehicles do not work after all..... It's not like the current petroleum infrastructure sprang up overnight fully developed you know....

When petro cars introduced, there was a dearth of gas stations as well so drivers couldn't travel very far either.

@@alganhar1 We are talking about now, not the past.

Meanwhile, Mike could have not gone out of his way to waste 5 minutes standing next to a hydrogen pump, and instead, he could have just plugged his Battery Electric Vehicle into an outlet at home before going to sleep for the night, and awoken to a full "tank" (charge).

The advantage petrol had (and has) though was that you could more or less put some in a bucket and take more with you. You can’t do that with hydrogen.

Thanks John. We'll see what happens!

After purchasing an EV, I can't see people rushing to get in on hydrogen. I can charge at home for dirt cheap, have 500 km of range whenever I wake up, no need for daily stops. I recently moved from Victoria to St.Johns, and drove my car across the entirety of Canada. Total cost at superchargers? 240 dollars. Average charge time is about 20-25 minutes, but after 4 hours on the road, it's nice to take a break and stretch your legs. Tesla chargers are usually close to some kind of food store, or grocery store, so you can stop for a snack.

@@tysonkauth7232 What I noticed with Tesla is whatever savings you get from no gas you end up spending on food :) Similar thing with cycling :)

Right on! Thanks!

Gas here in Vancouver is roughly $6 per gallon ($1.50 per litre). We have been living with these kinds of gas prices for a long time, so welcome to the club! hahaha.

And that is $5.50 Canadian

@@raynemichelle2996 a US gallon is 3.78 litres so if it's $4.56/US gallon - that works out to C$1.46/litre. In Victoria - our gas price is $1.54/litre

@@raynemichelle2996 I'm not sure where you're taking your figures from, but the comment from a Vancouverite just previous to yours puts gas at ( $1.50 X 3.78 = $5.67 Can. per U.S. Gallon ) or ( $1.50 X 4.53 = $6.80 Can, per Imperial Gallon )

Even then, it still stacks better than the enourmous waste of minerals to make EV batteries. Climate change is highly speculative science whilst the depletion of minerals like lithium for ev baterries is a huge concern. And it will be shortages left right and centre the coming years too. The EV shift will hit the wall of nature and physics...

@@larslover6559 "Enormous waste of minerals"? What do you think goes into an H2 car which Also has a battery - about 1/3 the size of an EV and electric motors And a platinum catylist in the fuel cell? Please tell me what you know of the LFP battery and why common Iron and phosphate are an enormous waste compared to the metals used in the PHEV. Lithium is abundant found in sea water and many clays. Tesla has an extraction method that uses agitation and salt water to free the lithium from these clays. The Only reason this hasn't moved forward has alot to do with the 10 year wait on all the permits for a mine. That's an artificial US govt problem. The metal is in no way hard to find and now, easy to extract without using traditional brine extraction from dry lake beds. The shortage is caused by beurocracy, not nature or physics. The rare earth elements everyone talks about are used in the Motor. Not in the battery. Same on PHEV as EV. There is No rare element used in LFP batteries. None. Tesla uses LFP and 4680 nickel based battery. The only constraint there: nickel.

​@@avgjoe5969 H2 car can be made using same material found in ICE car, because it is not bottlenecked by the battery. Design difference in battery & motor configuration is possible by sacrificing energy-efficient part for a material-efficient part; ie: 1) permanent magnet is not necessary, 2) lithium-ion battery is not necessary. The motor can be a larger type of induction motor (like used in ICE car starter motor & alternator), the battery can be a lower capacity Lead-acid or NiMH (like used in Hybrid car). For the fuel-cell; the platinum used in 2nd Gen Mirai for example is optimised to the amount already found in existing diesel car's catalytic exhaust converter. For H2 car using these part won't effect the range because H2 storage has large kWh capacity, but it effect fuel economy, ie: cost of refuelling.

@@larslover6559according to Wikipedia, lithium is very abundant and can be found in seawater (0.25mg per kg) and even in the dirt (20mg per kg) Unlike oil, lithium will only have to be mined once per battery vehicle, while oil is several tonnes per ICE vehicle over it’s lifetime A decent charging station can be setup at home for about $1k vs $2m for a hydrogen station. Add solar to the home and your battery is charged for free

It actually gives off carbon dioxide. Even if the hydrogen was produced using renewables you would be able to get around twice the mileage per kwh with a standard BEV than with a hydrogen car. Every step in the chain from producing the hydrogen to the fuel cell producing electricity in the car has large losses.

Thanks Quinton!

@@DownieLive you should do the same for a Tesla. Then you could make a comparison video, so it’s basically one idea for two videos.

@@DownieLive there is still only a dozen more or less.

Developed since then? The Car's internals haven't really changed since 10 years...

I think for now battery powered cars like the Tesla will win out over hydrogen fuel cell. But in the long run, I am quite certain that the fuel cell will win out.

But gas can charge in less than 5, and that’s what they’re all competing with.

@@melvinmcfly4498 the man says he wanted a car with more range and chose hydrogen, but there isn't enough hydrogen refilling stations for him to go out of town, which defeats his reasoning of picking hydrogen over electric. This has nothing to do with gas cars. He shoulda bought a Prius if he wanted more range and faster refilling.

@@archemity that is true, hydrogen still has almost no places to refuel so there isn’t much reason to use it.

@@melvinmcfly4498 And it cost more than gas, and is still a really dirty fuel and needs more power to be made too. Not to mention you can't have the stations inside city limits here at least, as we have seen in Norway they are prone to exploding.

@@melvinmcfly4498 But not for much longer, once ICE car makers begin the switch to electric...

Ya trade the fuel company for the electric company. Then bitch about them. Great idea.

In certain areas there’s superchargers, in most areas it’s just regular chargers as of now unless you’re in a bigger city.

@@KDlGG at the moment Tesla got the higher speed superchargers along the main highways enough to drive from coast to coast, new ones are being built every week and in car navigation shows the status of the charger and availability. The in city superchargers are more for the convenience of those who can't charge at home and aren't always the fastest ones. To charge you only plug in, no app or any other authentication necessary, payment goes from the credit card that's already on file when you buy the car. Overall it's a pretty well thought off and stress free experience. It only took me 2 charges to get from Langley, BC to Canmore, AB. One in Kamloops, 2nd in Revelstoke. $8-10 each. And barely enough time each charge to go use the washroom and grab a snack for the road.

@@ConstantinSirbu in Washington, where I’m at, you’re fucked unless you live in a sliver of central Washington and by the coast, anywhere else you’re way out of range where it’s not even worth it, like I said in bigger cities you have no issues, but as of yet for the majority of people it’s just not worth jt

There is a solution to all of that, well most of it. The fuel tank will always be heavy, it's compressed gas and that means solid steel tanks. But instead of deriving from fossil fuels, you build electrolysis factories and run them off of nuclear power plants which is the cleanest form of energy. After that, it's quite simple.

I don’t understand anything you said lol, I’m not a nerd sorry

@@precession6027 ok

@@usastrike5687 It is a simple process, but it's not very energy efficient, and that's kind of the problem. It's always the case that the nuclear energy used to make the hydrogen to fuel up FCEVs, would be able to charge 2-3 times as many battery electric cars, for the same amount of energy used in both cases. The underlying problem with producing hydrogen is that you need to change the state of the energy many times, each time you do it, you lose some of that energy content as heat at each step in the conversion process - batteries are much more energy efficient at doing this. A simple way to put this is: if we went either all Battery or all Hydrogen Fuell Cell tomorrow, going with hydrogen would require about 3 times as many new power plants to be constructed, vs the situation for battery vehicles. It's certainly possible, it just wouldn't be the best use of resources.

@@usastrike5687 fuel tank hydrogen is carbon fiber

Well it isn't as convenient as a normal EV, because you can't "refuel" this at home, on cheap rate energy or by using solar panels.

@@Brian-om2hh true

Nope it won't. Its a vastly more expensive way to do what an EV does in a car that's far simpler to build. Range is already 350 mi or so (400-500 in a few) in upper level EVs with battery prices due to plummet 50% in the next 3 years as superior/cheaper batteries scale up. (I don't count the paper battries like solid state as yet). LFP energy densities are rising, Cost to manufacture with sold electrolytes are much less. Charge rates rapidly increasing with tabless batteries and other technical approaches. The sun is setting fast on the PHEV with the massive cost of building out infrastructure, it would need many years to ramp at great taxpayer cost. It has Zero chance to become anything significant before its completely eclipsed as battery prices fall. The fact that people are still talking about this is a testament to how badly our educational system has fallen. Its like hearing people jabbering away about how 7 is really a smaller number than 3. The basic math isn't there. Its really quite annoying. H2 is a political football. Not a remotely viable solution.

agree, for now. but you know the nature of technology improves and the biggest drawback of electric vehicles is charge time mostly. but that can be improved with battery technology. however in 10-20-30 years who knows. Hydrogen falls off in efficiency and indirectness compared to pure ev's. In order to produce hydrogen they still require electricity, why go the long route when you can directly store that through a battery?

@@Unb0rnify Hello, I was reading your comments and I agree in the majority but had you thought about the cost of making the batteries needed for the electric cars, and for the hydrogen cars too. Booth use batteries to sore the energy but in comparison the hydrogen cars use a small battery because they produce and store only one part of it.

@@itsjortra291 thats an issue of production which as time goes on will be mostly resolved in my opinion. Tesla for instance claimed that in the future when most vehicles are out in the road are EV in 10-20-30 years they will be able to reuse batteries as recycleables. I believe the issues we see now are due to the fact that technology is still new and so is the means for production as well as the infrastructure. But time will resolve all things in my opinion

@@Unb0rnify Save we can't recycle Lithium at all, EVs are actually more harmful for the environment and require more energy input than traditional gas powered vehicles. Hydrogen is by far better, even with it's inefficiencies.

But you don't need battery to store Hydrogen gas. That's better than straght up electricity

Unless you use Nuclear Energy to create electricity.

@@touki7899 that does not make the process more efficient.

@@cjeam9199 "Nuclear power is already one of the most efficient types of energy available today. An average capacity factor of 91 percent beats other energy forms by a substantial margin. Natural gas produces an average of 50 percent while coal produces energy at almost 59 percent."

@@MT-rc3gn capacity factor is not the same as efficiency. The efficiency of the power generation does nothing to improve the efficiency of the electrolysis process either, it would only improve the efficiency of the overall use case, but it will never beat electric vehicle’s efficiency across the overall use case.

and it required natural gas (methane) to produce, so that sounds less environmentally friendly ..

Yeah, and I think this makes a potentially good alternative for people who can't plug in their car overnight.

Then you won't be pleased to know that it is extremely unlikely you will get a hydrogen station near you for the next 20 years...I should hang out for electric...

Oh yeah!!! That was a great video! My first video to hit 100K views. I guess my channel hasn't changed much 😂

I hope so, but right now, BEV's are ahead of hydrogen in the consumer marketplace. The lack of refueling infrastructure is the biggest impediment. Also, both BEV's and ICE vehicle technology is a moving target, since both technologies are constantly improving, making it that much harder for any competitors to gain an advantage. ICE's have a one-hundred year head start, and when this battle was fought at the turn of the 20th Century, GM's Charles "Boss" Kettering's invention of the self starter gave ICE's an insurmountable advantage over the competitors, steam and BEV's. Then, as now, recharge time and range are still the two biggest obstacles to widespread adoption of BEV's. Newer technology promises ever faster recharge times, but the low energy density of even the best batteries still requires the average BEV to carry around about 1500 pounds (680.4 kg) of battery weight to get range comparable to 120 pounds (54.4 kg) of gasoline. Note: Gasoline weighs about 6.0 lbs./gal., so a twenty (20) gallon gas tank holds about 120 pounds of gasoline.

You really do show your ignorance. There is no internal combustion engine in a hydrogen car. You could use an internal combustion engine but you would reduce the range by around 70%. Do some research.

My pleasure!

@@HamguyBacon Mm I wouldn't say it's a lie it's a naturally occurring phenomenon the climate is in constant change albeit not caused by vehicles this ev stuff is pure hype

@@stevewalsh-balshaw1727 it is cAused by vehicles in part of course

@@jacobdaniels3246 I agree however if a person has an ice vehicle and only drives when warrented for such as long journeys holidays etc instead of commutes the carbon footprint is way less than the manufacture of a new ev for instance I cover less than 3k a year folk need to stop using their cars for school runs local runs etc then these ev's are not required the hype concerning vehicles is way over represented by government and the media they would be better served on discussion of the 90% caused by none vehicular carbon emissions electricity production, housing, clothes manufacturer, farming etc the list goes on however as always the motorists are an easy hit

Maybe marginal in the US.. not so in other places where you can get 9$/gallon gasoline :P

@@rkan2 Since the hydrogen pricing in Mike's video is in British Columbia, it is the British Columbia price for fuel/charging that is relevant and more particularly the Lower Mainland.

Yeah, but how many BEVs can we build using rare earth materials?

Well, you could always have integrated electrolyzers, come back at home, fill it up with water, plug it over the night and let it electrolyze for cheaper than the cost at the station.

The future EV's will have zero problem driving long distances, and refill very rapidly. But the price need to come down for the whole segment, and I am sure it will. I bought my EV second hand and it has a low range. But it covers my commute, so for me its a dirt cheap and clean way to drive.

2 problems. 1: Most of the hydrogen in CA and US comes from steam reforming of fossil fuels and not electrolysis. 2: even if it came from electrolysis it is still way less efficient than a BEV. Tho I do believe that for large semi's and trucks it is an interesting option.

@@arthurizando would be great replacing diesel for trains too. But yeah, the only people who want it for passenger cars are in the Petroleum Industry. They want the converting gas to hydrogen, and they also want to reuse their investment in distribution and retail. If people start using BEVs largely charged at home then the Petroleum Industry loses a use for natural gas, and the distribution/transportation industry and the retail gas station industry. And the government loses all the tax revenue on gasoline sales. So as usual this technology is being promoted by some greedy old industry lobby trying to be obstructionist to stop any better way of doing things. And also should we mention that everyone will be driving around with bombs in their cars?

@@5353Jumper yeah, I forgot about train's. But yeah, for large vehicles like trucks, train's and, maybe, buses I believe it has some application. And the bomb part is a serious problem, I can't imagine how bad a rear high speed collision would be

@@5353Jumper I do not know if you noticed but we already *do* drive around with bombs in our cars. Do not see anyone complaining about that do we? The reason is because those 'bombs', ie, the Internal combustion engine plus the relevant fuel supply have been developed over the years to be as safe as it is possible to render what is essentially automotive power through controlled explosions..... Hydrogen will be exactly the same, made mostly safe through engineering and the application of practical and robust safety measures, just as has occurred with the internal combustion engine. Using the argument, oh look, now we have bombs in our cars is nonsensicle to anyone who currently drives or who has ever driven an internal combustion engine, it is literally the way the damned things work. More robust arguments are some of those already pointed out, such as where the vast majority of the Hydrogen actually comes from. But then there are robust arguments against BEV's as well, such as the sheer environmental carnage caused by Lithium mining and processing. We are never going to get around ANY of these if we pussy foot around with half arsed arguments whilst avoiding the practical realities, i.e., solving the shortcomings of both BEV's AND Hydrogen Cell vehicles....

@@alganhar1 sure hydrogen may have it's place...but for now we need to see that it is less efficient than bEV, using more energy for the same amount of work. And I have seen dozens of hydrogen proponents who say - yeah but lithium and cobalt and rare earth mining aren't green but they never use numbers, they just say it without backing it up. Then I see dozens of bEV proponents who take numbers for hydrogen, gasoline and bEV accounting for the mining of lithium and cobalt and other materials and the bEV still come out on top. So one side is willing to use number and the other side seems to want to hide the numbers. Even if the numbers are fudged a bit I still believe the bEV side because they are willing to bring the math to the table and admit some of the negatives of their approach. The hydrogen side is obviously the side promoted by petroleum companies and funded by their dollars with profit motive in mind, and the petroleum Industry has recently lost all my respect. They are willing to kill millions of people to preserve their profits and that is despicable. Spilled gasoline burns as a relatively cool flame, dangerous but not explosive. Burst batteries burn a crazy hot flame, dangerous but not explosive. The safety plan for hydrogen is to limit the size of the fuel tanks in the vehicle, and if the gas escapes it will disperse into the air fairly quickly to not be explosive concentrations. This all sounds fine to me except if it does get trapped in a small space like a garage, or if it is in really large volumes like stored at a fuel station or being transported in a large truck. Dispersing into the air could make it safer than gasoline (or batteries) but if it is not allowed to disperse then it is far more explosive than either of them. And I am definitely not going to take the word of anyone in the petroleum industry trying to convince me that something they need to preserve market share in transportation fuels is safe.

"Never stop adventuring" "Embrace your inner child" "Stay fearless & stay curious" "Stay positive. Stay wild" “I don’t ask u anything, just if u want, give my GoProvids a chance and you’ll see...”

No problem!!

@@DownieLive WE have the first hydrogen fuel station in Victoria close to us. The University (about 2 km away) is putting in another.

Same here

Funny,he showed a very old fashioned Mirai,the new one is much better.

The tech has been in existence since the 1960's, and has been used on every American Manned Space Mission since Gemini (1965) to the Space Shuttle. The oxygen tank that exploded on Apollo 13 was there to mix with hydrogen from another tank in the Service Module in a fuel cell to provide electrical power to the Command and Service modules and drinking water for the astronauts.

No. Very biassed. You need a hydrogen powered car like a hole in the head.

and think about the fact that Apollo used fuel cells to land on the Moon before 1970. Wasnt even born then and now it looks like something big new stuff.

Right?!! It's great!

No.

Cool, thanks. Yeah, that was a funny coincidence.

@@shakumpum H2 cars have batteries too... and no we're not swimming in an "ocean of free renewables" ... grow up.

@@shakumpum Dumbest RU-vid comment I have read all year.Did you sleep threw science class? By the way hydrogen has been hyped for decades.

Hydrogen is OK if you have great amounts of surplus energy. The efficiency means they need three times as much energy to drive as EV's. In a world doubling the power demand in the next decades, hydrogen is not a good solution for cars. But sure for ships and some other use cases, it will be very sensible.