The Difference Between Gasoline And Hydrogen Engines 

Exactly! 14 minutes is a semester

Because they need to fill their 40h/week contract

Jason doesn't need to constantly deal with that disruptive kid in the back row.

​@@jonskowitz Yep, that's what I was going at. I wasn't that interested either back then so I was that kid some times, but a group of uninterested kids makes classes so unproductive. Respect for those teachers. And nice for Jason that he has just interested viewers that keep quiet while he is talking. :D

@@jonskowitz glad someone said it. Corralling idiots in the worlds most expensive daycare doesn't do educators any favors

Did he really mention that CO2 is highly preferred pollution over NOx? Must of missed it. NOx is an oxidizing agent and will react with other gases, particles, etc What you end up with is ground level ozone, smog, acid rains and more issues. My main concern is that this guy know it but make no mention while claiming "at least we get rid of that Carbon pollution" without even a mention about NOx big issues. It cause respiratory problem, allergies, inflammation of the lungs and throat, etc. How do I know he does ? He know what he talk about on it for the rest of the video. Bit of a bias when you claim a good thing you get rid of is CO2 when you dont show the other is worse. Its hundredS of time more dangerous for our climate. Why do people never explain that impress me. But such is youtube I suppose. (not trying to pull him down, still a fun watch)

Walter Cronkite delivered news via television in that manner just facts. One wanted to watch his newscasts.

@@littlegile5072 and the pollution of batteries to make them and throw away

@@littlegile5072 Because we have things called catalytic converters, and for diesels DEF exhaust fluid...

@@onlythewise1 You do realize that Hydrogen is the way forward... All electric cars are not... Until battery technology can advance to the point of recyclable, high capacity, high voltage, compact batteries arrive. Which there is already tests on solid state batteries and solid state hydrogen fuel cells that will be the future. Oh and you can make hydrogen in your garage from water using electricity... Can you do that with fossil fuels?! 👌😉😜

and dont forget with hydrogen back fire is easier :)

@@JoaoSilva-bh3de I am a bit confused about the advantage in burning speed. All my knowledge points that you cannot make power with fast burning vapors in a combustion engine. There is no point in fast igniting when we are near TDC. What you need, is a fuel that still burns and produces more pressure when piston is in optimum angle, about 50% down. That is why nitromethane makes so much power, it burns slower than gasoline. And vapors in general burn 3x faster than gasoline, only some 10-20% of piston travel. So i assume that hydrogen engine cannot make significant power without reducing the speed of combustion. I understand that in racing they use water injection, but naturally that is not viable in street use. GM claims to bring hydrogen-combustion truck engine soon. But in the presentation if you reed between the lines, they still have not resolved this issue. And there is no guarantee that they ever will.

With these gas prices I’m wanting to convert my 454 1 ton to hydrogen 🤣🤣🤣🤣

@@mirafioristi you can actually control that in your ignition timing, retard or advanced depending on your setup

@Off The Grid What is the problem witch implemention on both hydrogen and evs?

Engineer would call it ignition, because there’s a quick flash with no flame present

​@@chrisnewman7281 There's always a flame, you just need a slow motion camera to see it.

That's what I will call my farts from now on

Politicians in Australia will start referring to climate fires as thermal events to play down the seriousness of it all haha

@@chrisnewman7281 I worked in automotive engineering for one of the Big 3 for many years. We were more or less required to called it a "thermal event", especially in written documentation and correspondence for reasons that, believe it or not, were required by the legal department. This is very important to protect intellectual property in the event of a law suit or recall. Better to say, "the brake test data does not meet the engineering criteria", rather than, "the brakes fade too quickly and are dangerous"

Glad you enjoyed it, thanks for watching!!

How does running lean reduces Nox if you run lean on a gasoline engine Nox will increases because of heat not decrease. Is there a difference between Hydrogen engines

@@natedavis5574 The activation energy to break the simple H2 bond is VERY low, and the reason Hydrogen gas is dangerous in quantity; the activation energy to break the C-H bond is higher, so because ignition temperature is lower, more oxygen reacts with Hydrogen than happens with Octane or other hydrocarbons. 2H2 + O2 => 2H2O is a much lower 'energy hill' to get over than with hydrocarbon combustion, so less of the triple N2 bonds are broken and less NOx is formed; make sense?

@@HuntingTarg thanks for the education

@@HuntingTarg If it's lean it means there is excess oxygen that can (potentially) react with nitrogen. (Don't claim a lean hydrogen burn has NO NOX at all, it it's not lean enough it will have nox for sure) Whether that happens pretty much depends on the temperature. H2+O2=H20 and N2+O2=NOX are 2 separate reactions, if O2+N2 get hot enough they will form NOx. The thing where hydrogen and petrol differ is this: when an lpg, cng, diesel, petrol, etc engine is running rich it means more liquid fuel will turn into a gas (this is why water injection reduces emissions) and if you inject too much fuel then there is no oxygen left to marry the nitrogen. If you run lean obviously the opposite is happening. For hydrogen engines the max flame temperature 2600°C is achieved at a stochiometric a/f mixture; the zeldovich reaction (N2+O/N+O2=nox) usually occurs above 1600°C, but it does occur below that temp as well under certain conditions. When a hydrogen a/f mixture is leaner it will burn cooler because there is less fuel(less energy) that has to heat up the same volume (all the gasses inside your reaction chamber). Hydrogen is already a gas, so when hydrogen burns there is no liquid that needs to boil, and boiling is an endothermic reaction. Even simpler said: it takes energy to turn a liquid into a gas, and when you inject water or inject extra diesel/petrol into your engine it's extra liquid that sucks up heat. Lean petrol runs hotter than stochiometric petrol, lean hydrogen runs cooler than stochiometric hydrogen. That's the difference.

Until you get into 1 car accident and with a tank full of hydrogen you'll blow everyone within 30 meters to straight to hell.

So, a diesel-like engine structure would be recommended?

@@exploranator my thoughts exactly. diesel-like would bypass some of the downsides presented in this video and Mike's observation.

does that also mean hydrogen is right now a better fuel source for heavy duty machinery like trucks and farming/construction equipment? because I think unless the weight of the engine can be sorted out to both resist high pressure but also be light; I’m not sure it could rev up despite the power increase

@@egonzalezm If I remember they've done diesel to hydrogen conversions with just a few attachments

4M and we can have a big auditorium.

@@GilbertoMadeira83 live lessons from Jason haha. I would go.

I just saw that he only has 2M subs while PewDiePie has 75M. What's wrong with this world...

Chevy SparkEV you meant “almost 78 mil subscribers”, right?

@@mychevysparkevdidntcatchfi1489 Most people aren't smart enough to understand these white board videos.

Balanced, hehe

Just proves one needn't delve too deeply into the higher maths to convey physics and chemistry. It's important to understand the 'mechanics' of processes before being thrown to the lions of calculus. As Einstein said: “Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand.”

There's not much chemistry in it though!

you need to learn not just listen and forget after a day or so

you don't get a diploma YOU GET A MARS BAR :P

@@martinkuliza ive heard of those they still exist?

@@longboarderebright What ?? You've HEARD OF THEM huh ? HAHAHA wow of course they exist mate, you go to the local shop and you pick one up. Where do you live ? that they appear to be in short supply i'm in Australia

Or least a college credit. You learn way more here than most colleges

I appreciate that he gets paid for it so I understand that your appreciation is somewhat misplaced .. 🤑🤑🤑

Thank you so much for watching!! :)

Who said retired engineer? There is no such a thing sir. If you need, I'll be glad to have you file some patents. I'm sure you can type? Or do voice to text? Stay sharp. All the best.

@FAWEXX don't get me started on German cars.

PolskaWalczaca 😆

@@itsalgud1459 👍🍺

Use it with a friend, a teacher, a parent! Diffuse away!

As long as it doesn't have anything to do with farts diffusing...

In order for farts to effective they must diffuse.

"to be effective'

@@azopene lol. Indeed.

Toyota would say this guy is wrong and this guy is a useless engineer.

Your teachers were taught in public schools. Vicious circle, yes?

That's a while back, thanks for sticking around!! :)

@@EngineeringExplained oh im so trying this tomorrow, - hho video up by friday ;-)

Came to the comments to say the same thing, I haven't been around quite as long but I was just thinking the other day about your more recent videos -- I do like them quite a bit, but the whiteboard videos are my favs.

I'm a total dork, I LOVE all the engineering nerd talk and information that you generally will not get anywhere else.

I gotta say though, the transition to his new V8 whiteboard is much appreciated.

And you know what! It was YOU!

Haha love it! Thanks for the reply man, means a lot. You're one of the reasons I'm creating on RU-vid myself on my own channel! Always loved your work man, please check out mine, any criticism or advice would be warmly welcomed! 👍

Lol... it's funny that at this point this is a dated reference. I wonder how many people got it. It still works out of context so I'm not sure I can just count the likes.

The big problem with hydrogen is fuel leaks. Hydrogen will leak through steel tanks with little difficulty. It also tends to form bubbles under overhanging roofs unless they are vented. This means that any enclosed space around a hydrogen tank will have hydrogen present, the wide air fuel ratio will mean the gas mixture will be explosive (the absolute lower explosive limit being about 1.5% hydrogen in air). This translates as having to make the interior of the car a legally defined electrical hazardous area, requiring all the wiring to be either explosion proof or intrinsically safe.

@@allangibson8494 Perhaps you didn't know, more house fires that are not arson are started by an electrical short in a car in an attached garage than anything else. Ask your insurance agent why attached garages increase premium cost. Also, spilled gasoline fumes will hug the ground without air stirring. H2 will 'float' away if vented. But yeah, hydrogen is much more difficult to contain.

With hydrogen you can actually step on the gas. Petrol is a liquid under standard conditions, so no idea why some people keep referring to it as a “gas”. 🤣

@@JamesUKE92 Because in the states it is called gasoline not petrol.

Tonight I'll fly

@@JamesUKE92 because it atomizes before ignition?

Can you with a diesel?

Thanks for sharing with your kids Phillip! Hopefully they're not too bored with them haha.

@@EngineeringExplained you do a great job..!!

@@EngineeringExplained So what would happen to the NO2 level and the combustion process if you added a typical nitrous plate below the throttle body and instead of injecting Nitrous oxide you injected a spray of water to cool the burn? Would it help lower the temp and lower the NO2 in the exhaust?

always*

How do you want to extract the O2 from the air that enters the engine?

@@annekecornee very likely by using a liquid oxygen tank, but that would increase weight and reduce efficiency.

Yup, Hydrogen Embrittlement was exactly what I was wondering about. I also realized this is a big problem for Fuel Cell vehicles as well. During ignition and burn at high pressure there certainly would be a tiny amount of high temp ionized hydrogen atoms. These would work their way into almost anything. Glad to see someone else thought of this as well.

And much like the hydrogen, the Oxygen will be expensive to obtain, but as a by product of the hydrogen production. BTW, electrolysis of water about equals the energy obtained by the combustion of H₂ and O₂. and that energy will still come from remote power stations burning hydrocarbons, with greater than 50% energy loss in transmission.

@@brucefrank6119 Oxygen is a byproduct of Electrolysis of Water to produce Hydrogen However...Most Hydrogen Is Produced By Steam Reformation of Methane. As I understand it the products of Steam Reformation are Hydrogen and CO2 (or it could be just Carbon. Been a while since I did the studying). As for Electrolysis being equal in energy consumption to the amount of energy produced by burning H2 and O2 I believe you will find Electrolysis to be less efficient. Also it is important that we don't confuse Thermal Watts with Electrical Watts. They are very different in terms of looking at efficiencies. As for transmission losses...sheeeeee...don't get me started!

What?

@@lorenzhartl8466 Being exposed to lead at an early age stunts intellectual development. This channel does the opposite.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 🤣🤣🤣🤣 🤣🤣🤣 🤣🤣 🤣... 🤔

Glad you enjoy the content, and best of luck in the engineering world!

It's just slightly disturbing that the next generation of engineers is learning from RU-vid

@@gasdive why? They would have learned a lot from the people around them before. So long as they look into what they are trying to implement more before they do it (to fix any misconceptions), this is ok

Keep learning from several sources. It's just another tool in your arsenal. Good luck.

Yeah, RU-vid's algorithm is a bit choppy today, so unfortunately the video didn't get pushed out much. There were basically zero views for an hour or so on RU-vid, and I happened to schedule my video during that window (I post the same time every week haha).

Engineering Explained Is this a Honda Clarity review teaser?

@@bleebleblahble8833 He wouldn't say that haha.

Thanks bob! I try to only if it seems necessary. Easy to play it back, after all. :)

As a retired Engineer, and having sat through more meetings than any person should have had to, it's a rare trait. Great job. PS, an actual argument between two PhD's, "Did not," "Did too!" "Did not!" "Did too!" I got looks of distain because I'd sit in the corner and laugh.

Thanks! Hydrogen combustion engines are pretty neat!

@Edmond Schwab indeed it did.

Nah it had a non european immigration event

Not quite true. It is indeed very much higher in energy density per kg, 141-120 MJ/kg at 690 bar where gasoline is 46.4 MJ/kg. The problem of hydrogen is that the gas itself if not very dense and if you see in the table concerning volume it has a energy density on about 5 MJ/L.

@@feonor26 yes. But hydrogen, unlike gasoline, can be compressed. So you can mitigate the volumetric density issue by pressuring it. You could also use liquid hydrogen, though thats significantly more challenging because you have to cool it to 20k. Pressurized hydrogen still isn't as volumetrically dense as gasoline. But its closer. And because its also much more efficient, you don't need to carry as much for the same range. So with hydrogen using the same tank space, you'll lose maybe 15-25% of the range. Which will still put it well above EVs. Also note, lithium batteries are fucktons less dense than even hydrogen.

@@Erowens98 Yeah lithium ion batteries sucks balls compared to gasoline and hydrogen when we talk energy density. It functions okay on city driving etc., but those people who wants to put batteries in a plane? Lol...dream on. Unless we're going to get our hands on a super safe, super efficient alien battery technology soon, it's not gonna happen.

@@feonor26 yeah, not to mention towing any significant load. You get less than half the range.

@@Erowens98 compressing the hydrogen will makeit much less eficient, a lot of energy in needed to do it, thus making it unviable

Not really, H2 is still subject to fuel transportation limitation. You need H2 station infrastructure that is orders of magnitude more expensive than charging stations. Charging station infrastructures are not that bad in U.S. anymore, but H2 station infractructure is almost non-existent.

Han and the best companies to do that are Petronas, Shell. They already have an infrastructure that can be modified and scaled for hydrogen for not much cost. But as soon a they spend and start selling they’ll most likely gain back what they spent and still profit as usual. Smaller companies will struggle but it’s still feasible

@@DrummerBoii1411 If I remember correctly, the problem with H2 isn't just the infrastructure cost, it's also the production. With today's technology, H2 production is less efficient than lithium batteries.

@@Sickboyfriend -- I think HFCEVs could work for applications other than passenger vehicles. In cases where refueling has to be kept at a minimum in both duration and frequency while uptime has to be maximized, the drawbacks of fuel cells versus batteries start to become an acceptable price to pay. Heavy transport such as buses, cargo trucks and service trucks won't need as much infrastructure investment since only a single H₂ refueling station in a bus depot can provide for that entire fleet. The same can be said about trucks and trains.

@@triggermovies Lithium has a storage capacity limitation while *excess hydrogen* production could be injected into existing natural gas infrastructure. Where deep offshore wind power would be the only ideal source of hydrogen. As doubling of wind speed increases potential energy outout by eight. So a 2 MW wind turbine @ 12 mph wind would make around 16 MW @ 24 mph wind. To clarify, I'm not suggesting electrical cables being ran that far. What I'm proposing is pumping hydrogen that distance as it's cheaper and lighter than running electrical cables far distances. Once reaching land half should go towards dedicated hydrogen gas powered turbines for power generation that would recover water from the exhaust stream assisting water management. The remainder should be used for alternative fuel feed stocks such as methane or methanol. Sabatier process combines hydrogen + CO2 to produce methane, AKA CNG. Hydrogen + carbon monoxide can be processed to make methanol. Both these processes require heat that should ideally siphon it from existing power generation decreasing cooling tower demand and technically increase power plant efficiency. As it would be considered a combined heat and power generation plant.

Thanks for watching Randall!

They stopped it due to problems cause by hydrogen. Hydrogen makes most metals brittle over time.

@@sebastianm.4632 most people only keep their car for a few years anyways. I'm surprised the automobile companies don't use hydrogen more to validate that wasteful use. I wish I had the time to modify an engine into a hydrogen engine

@@sand0decker Hydrogen has its own operating parameters that must be designed for; and again, hydrogen can diffuse into metals under heat and pressure, disrupting their alloy configuration and changing their properties. Hydrogen is obnoxiously difficult stuff to work with (what with being a perfect fluid, flammable, combustible, etc; Elon Musk cited the "pain-in-the-@$$ factor" as one of the reasons for switching over to methane-LOX from LH2-LOX), and running a gasoline-designed engine block on H2 can cause more problems than running it on ethanol.

@@HuntingTarg I meant that as in a city use vehicle. Most people only go short distances and don't maintain their own vehicle, so as far as they are concerned, less gas is good. Just because something is hard to design for doesn't necessarily mean it's not worth the effort. I'm not sure, but I think some of our city buses use hydrogen. I think one of them had a logo saying it. It could have been a test item though, I did go to a college in the capital of my country

@@sand0decker did you really just say people only keep their cars for a few years so we can afford the engine degrading faster?

Correct, this is about engines, not fuel cells. I have a separate video on fuel cell vehicles: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-0jnZFGx_4kY.html

Yeah, which is why hydrogen cars are going to be way more lame than they should be.

videoofmike I’m not so sure you see BMW worked on hydrogen ICE in the mid-2000s and they even build 100 costumer cars back then. It was powered by a reworked V12 engine which was a derivation of the N73 B60 and could run on both petrol and hydrogen (if I remember correctly). When run on hydrogen it had around 270 HP (petrol 445HP). Despite having the regular fuel tank, which was good for 500 km it had 8kg of hydrogen in it for an additional 200 km. So the adaptation is fairly small (at least you would not need a total redesign but could lean heavily on what’s already achieved). I can only speculate if from an efficiency standpoint a direct injected compression process (like a diesel) would be better... I remember seeing the BMW prototypes and the “production” car at the Frankfurt Auto Show in the 2000s. I guess the financial crisis and relatively low oil prices finally killed the projects back then. Also the emphasis on environmental issues where less present.

You can totally run any ICE engine on hydrogen, back in the day with carburetors you could just feed it straight into the air intake and the car would work as if nothing changed. But long term you do get material degradation.

With current laws storing it will be the challenge. You dont want the general public to be driving around in bombs should they crash... the tank has to be damn near indestructible. Also making / purifying the Hydrogen in the first place is quite energy intensive

Engines! Hoping that makes it clear it's about combustion, and the thumbnail haha. :)

wouldnt make ANY sense but yeah why not lul

ECO-doritos. 🍂 🌎

no

@@pigsnoutman needs a rotary engine that doesn't use Doritos as it's rotor

Mazda already built one of these. Fast flame propagation would be nice, but since hydrogen has even less lubrication properties than gasoline I imagine the oiling system is more taxed. It'd be cool and I'm a rotary fanboy but I don't see how something like that goes mass market.

If the second drawing is accurate, then yes.

I'm STILL ! Waiting !! For !! The ! CELICA ! XT !! and LT ! Models ! To be in The SHOWROOM !!

We can use renewable and nuclear energy to harvest the hydrogen and oxygen from seawater. The only question I have is: is it more efficient to store the power from renewables and nuclear inside batteries and use those for transport vehicles OR is a tank of hydrogen (being used for an internal combustion engine) a more efficient power storage solution?

@@joshuaewalker No. The Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) is very inefficient for converting chemical energy to motion. The hydrolysis process is also very inefficient at converting electricity to chemical energy. There are further inefficiencies compressing these gasses to high pressure or chilling them to liquid. Then there are layers of economic inefficiency taking profit at each step in fossil fuel exploration subsidies, extraction, refining/production, transportation, storage and retail. Lithium-Ion batteries, such as those in Tesla vehicles, can full cycle at around 95% efficiency. (Assuming good driving practices and slow overnight charging.) The AC electric infrastructure is highly efficient and home solar collectors bypass the fossil fuel infrastructure.

@@joshuaewalker Use the H2 and O2 in a fuel cell. It's way more efficient than an ICE. Connected with a small battery and capacitor bank you'll have no issues with sudden accelerations (fuel cell efficiency decreases as power draw increases).

Haha ask questions, I'm here to help! :)

Ha, I tried as well !. Ive got a mechanical engineering degree, and I was struggling.

I have an ME degree and we barely touched on otto cycle and diesel cycle and even less on lamba/air fuel ratios.. Ive had to teach myself most of this stuff with the internet

@@EngineeringExplained Please cover hydrogen commercial vehicles, both prototypes and mass production. I find it a very interesting topic.

I believe this would also lead to hot spots, especially around the ringss which could cause the fuel to ignite at the wrong time

My Uncle used HHO and gasoline hybrid and got a ripper of a sidevalve application, Torque and economy went through the roof.

@@altruismfirst6489 the injection of HHO into the intake plenum of spark ignition reciprocating engines along with the normal fuel it usually burns, is probably the best way to apply it on an engine of that type... However, one of the best ways to harness re-newable / re-usable energy that HHO offers, is in a gas-turbine engine... The timing of the fuel burn is not extremely critical with those types of engines, and they will work very well with Pure HHO , because of the advantage of not having to produce fuels with predictable burn times, that the vast majority of the reciprocating type of engines have to operate with...And the potential power to weight ratio of gas turbine engines is FAR better than any type of reciprocating engines...

Sounds like timing can be adjusted both with spark timing and mixture proportion.

Or some other clean(er) fuel, that preferably is more practical (like DME)

Thom kouwen what’s dme

Winslow Greaves would rather have hydrogen cars than electric cars.

DME = Dimethyl Ether. Also known as "Bio-Diesel" here im Brazil

Hydrogen is not a fuel source. It is merely a means of storing energy that has to be converted from another source. This makes it a rather inefficient fuel to burn. Especially since it is usually converted from propane.

I'd like to see this as well.

Very funny... ;)

Why burning oxygen what humand need for breathing? What about people living 24/7 inside crowded cities? You don't care about them, as long you can drive your noisy and air polluting car?

@@eDriver The oxygen is already used by gasoline and Diesel engines... And this engine would use PURE oxygen, that is in the water...

You can't run an engine on water because it takes the same energy to crack water into H2 and O2 gas as you get from burning the H2 and O2 gas. Therefore, you would need a separate engine in the car to create the electricity for cracking water. And this engine would be 30% to 40% to 50% efficient (gasoline ice, diesel ice, turbo jet, respectively). And the electrical systems would be about 90% efficient. And a hydrogen ICE would be between 25% and 40% efficient, whereas an H2 fuel cell is 50% efficient. All those engines and systems under one hood, resulting in less and less efficiency? Those mysterious deaths were probably guys working themselves to death to solve a problem that can't be solved.

MultiPleaser I think you totally missed the point of his post. You just overly explained the problem that he already mentioned.

Why do you want to carry oxidiser onboard when you get it for free from the atmosphere?

They use cryogenic hydrogen to make the tanks smaller, but there is still the drawback that such low temperatures need loads of insulation which adds weight again.

@@elekktrisch8087 The fuel has to be liquid, so obviously it's cryogenic. Liquid hydrogen requires around 11x more volume than kerosene or gasoline for the same mass. Even when factoring in the higher energy content of hydrogen, the tank volume required is still massively higher. Liquid hydrogen is also a much more difficult fuel to store and handle due to its extremely low temperature. This is why very few rockets use hydrogen fuel for their first stage; it's just not worth it.

The same handling problems exist no matter what stage it is.

@@tedmoss Yes, but the other issues largely disappear when talking about upper stages.

@@harbingerdawn Thank you for the explanation, that was brilliant how you state this fact

aMmONiA IsN'T VerY fLAmMaBLe

@@zephyrtolliver4113 Ammonia for cleaning is mostly water. Pure NH3 is very flammable, almost as good as gasoline and easier to store than H2. But I don’t have the depth of knowledge to compare in ICE use.

Aramco has teased NH3 for a variety of applications, with the primary focus being Aviation

Gasoline and diesel already produce water in combustion, and yes, exhausts should be stainless by law, I think.

Hydrogen needs a lot of space for storing. Smaller cars are not really possible if you want comparable range to gasoline or battery cars. The Toyota Mirai has 3 tanks for the Hydrogen, and of course a rechargeable Lithium battery + electronics to manage the entire car. Yes you need a rechargeable battery if you do Fuel-Cells. And if you go hydrogen it's the only worthwhile option, since combustion just adds more complexity to the system again, and thus reduces reliability substantially. Though, the battery is not that large, which also poses the issue that it won't have the life span of a larger battery pack like in a Tesla Model 3 LR for example. Also mind you: While the Mirai is a massivly huge car, it has a tiny trunk, due to the hydrogen tanks. You can't even fold the rear seats, because Toyota put the electronics and battery behind the rear seats. Hyundais hydrogen Fuel-Cell car lets you fold the rear seats, but the trunk is still very small due to the fuel tanks. It's also worth noting, that you can drive almost 2000 km with a fully electric car from the energy that is needed to produce and transport enough Hydrogen to a fuel station for 100 km of driving. Sides of the Infrastructure for Hydrogen being a lot more expensive than it is for fully electric cars.

ICE vs BEV

And a manual 💪🏼

Probably simpler to react the hydrogen with CO2 to make methanol and then use that as fuel. Much simpler to handle and store since it is liquid at room temperature and pressure. But it is lower energy density than kerosene so the range will suffer a bit.

@@zapfanzapfan Right. Fuel tanks 15 to 30 times larger makes for huge aeroplanes

shipping will be the last to switch, when u look at the emissions of container ships etc you realise they are massive polluters. and the amount of them can and have changed weather patterns in the pacific..

Great very informative

@@imoovabull6042 ships also have the option of using nuclear energy. If it weren’t for the relatively small canals we have, we’d see way more massive nuclear cargo ships.