Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Gregorian

(23,867 posts)
15. Sorry, I spaced on that reply. My brain was somewhere else.
Fri May 8, 2015, 06:41 PM
May 2015

I know consumers play a big role in product design, but the planet doesn't care about how long it takes to fill a tank. Or how many miles per charge or refill.

The big bottom line for me is the infrastructure, or lack thereof. The rest is moot. What are we going to do, build a national hydrogen grid? Truck zillions of tankers with the stuff? Come on, that's just stupid. We have a grid. And now we have smaller grids.

I'll admit that there's a time factor constraint for this change in how we convert energy. But I'm basing my arguments on the time that seems reasonable for battery technology to reach levels that will be acceptable to users. I think primarily it already is, based on typical user behavior, in cars at least. Price has kept that one away. And this includes the barriers that have precluded faster battery development. You don't see Congress pushing that stuff through like the XL pipeline. It's a kind of anti-subsidy.

Too many negatives on the hydrogen side.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

It's a net energy loss from the start, and then we don't have a hydrogen infrastructure. Fail! Gregorian May 2015 #1
I've about had enough of your bullsh*t nationalize the fed May 2015 #2
I'm not doing it for me. I'm doing it for the people who might not know better. Gregorian May 2015 #3
“A net energy loss from the start” OKIsItJustMe May 2015 #6
I agree. Gregorian May 2015 #7
Except that I disagree; it’s far from a “no brainer” OKIsItJustMe May 2015 #8
Yes, but the topic is about cars, and that's not a best use. Gregorian May 2015 #10
The comparison to an internal combustion engine doesn’t seem apropos OKIsItJustMe May 2015 #11
Imperfect Graphene Opens Door to Better Fuel Cells OKIsItJustMe May 2015 #14
Sorry, I spaced on that reply. My brain was somewhere else. Gregorian May 2015 #15
“The big bottom line for me is the infrastructure, or lack thereof.” OKIsItJustMe May 2015 #16
I can't figure out how this will ever be economically feasible? mackdaddy May 2015 #4
Because it maintains a business model caraher May 2015 #5
I think Chu (and Toyota) are right OKIsItJustMe May 2015 #9
Not really. hunter May 2015 #12
Now, wait a second here OKIsItJustMe May 2015 #13
Ever compare the cost of a hydrogen fueling station to a charging station? caraher May 2015 #17
How many charging stations are needed to support as many cars as one filling station? OKIsItJustMe May 2015 #18
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Germany's first hydrogen ...»Reply #15