• dan@upvote.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 year ago

    I like the idea of EVs because I (and a lot of other people here in California) have a solar system that produces more electricity than what I need day-to-day, so charging the car is effectively free. I don’t have an EV yet but will probably buy one next year.

    I really like like the Ioniq 5 and 6, but it’s kinda ugly at the front and back. I just want an EV that looks like a car, not some futuristic-looking thing.

      • dan@upvote.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I do but the rate is very low.

        The cost of electricity in summer is around $0.45/kWh in peak times and $0.37/kWh in off-peak times. I get 1:1 credits for excess generation, so any overproduction during the day can offset usage at night or on cloudy days.

        However, if I have credits left at the yearly true-up, they’re only cashed out at around $0.04/kWh. There’s more value in using the credits rather than cashing them out.

    • Hypx@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      1 year ago

      FCEVs basically mean the same thing, and it will be viable for everyone and not just the rich.

      • Player2@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Batteries are only getting cheaper and I have never seen a hydrogen station or even vehicle in my entire life.

        • Hypx@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          17
          ·
          1 year ago

          You probably didn’t see a BEV until the last several years. FCEVs will plunge in cost until they are no more expensive than ICE cars. That will be the real revolution.

          • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            How come you know this?

            We’ve seen pushes for hydrogen, hard ones. And yet ultimately they had to concede that the inherent downsides of hydrogen make them only useful in a select few situations, compared to BEVs that are far better fits especially in the small/commute personal car market where their already short charging duration is irrelevant due to the briefness of the trip.

            Not everyone is a professional truck or long distance bus driver where hydrogen can play to its strengths. Even with busses, my city has fully electrified busses with gasoline ones only being used as a backup now. The way they do it is by having a slightly larger spare fleet than normal, so busses can charge while others are running, and then swapping them as a bus nears the end of its lap where everyone has to exit anyways. Intra-city busses benefit massively from regenerative braking, after all.

            I mean, do humor me, because I thought hydrogen was a fantastic idea, until I actually read up on it and it turns out it’s not actually a very good tech, as cool scifi as it sounds at first.

            • intensely_human@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              We had pushes for electric cars too and after decades all we had was a few overpriced, underperforming examples that took forever to charge. Electric cars were a non-market-viable novelty for a long time.

            • Hypx@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              1 year ago

              I do my homework. It’s all about following the evidence.

              Toyota has already come out and say that a fuel cell car costs the same as an ICE car to build, at least in theory. But it has very small resource requirements, so it seems self-evident that it is the case.

              You don’t have to make a compromise. If there’s a way to power a car just like a conventional gasoline car, while also being a zero emissions electric car, then there’s no reason to oppose the idea.

              Most engineers in the car industry actually believe the hydrogen car is the future. And they still do. What you’re hearing on social media is just a lot of marketing BS coming from BEV companies. Most of these accounts are Tesla drivers or investors. None of them are being honest.

              • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                1 year ago

                Toyota has already come out and say that a fuel cell car costs the same as an ICE car to build, at least in theory. But it has very small resource requirements, so it seems self-evident that it is the case.

                Isn’t one of the big downsides of hydrogen fuel cells the required platinum, even after the improvement of not bonding them to carbon?

                You don’t have to make a compromise. If there’s a way to power a car just like a conventional gasoline car, while also being a zero emissions electric car, then there’s no reason to oppose the idea.

                Hydrogen is not a zero-emissions thing, and I hope that you didn’t pick that up from “sources”, because you speak about others going by social media information while - apparently - believing that hydrogen is a zero-emissions system. (neither is BEV, at least not in a well-to-wheel-comparative scenario, mind you)

                Most engineers in the car industry actually believe the hydrogen car is the future. And they still do. What you’re hearing on social media is just a lot of marketing BS coming from BEV companies. Most of these accounts are Tesla drivers or investors. None of them are being honest.

                What about all the other car companies then, that should have a vested interesent in marketing-wise opposing Tesla, yet even after initial pushes to hydrogen, Toyota and Honda quickly swapped to a near-100% BEV fleet? Wouldn’t your logic dictate that if hydrogen was a valid alternative as-is, then companies would lean hard on that as their USP compared to Tesla? Especialy in North America where Tesla is so dominant, but which is also just about the only place where hydrogen vehicles have any existence and hence usable network at all?

                Last stats I’ve seen still had hydrogen at 50%-100% more pollution than gasoline cards while also costing ~2x as much per kilometer for the owner. Of course, in theory all hydrogen can be produced from solar/wind/etc, but:

                • The losses during production and shipping are so big that the amount of energy is absurd.
                • The extra storage and shipping problems are entirely unsolved at the scale personal vehicles would require. Nevermind the further reduction in final efficiency they incur.
                • Right now >90% of hydrogen is produced from methane, as electrolysis is just not a valid source. Without serious technological advancements, switching to hydrogen would actually make things worse.
                • Speaking of making things worse: We worry about batteries in crashes and fires. We mind the pollution from their materials in such cases. Both issues are, at present, worse for hydrogen.

                Sure, maybe in 40-100 years, people might scoff at the idea that hydrogen was ever not a valid way of powering a personal vehicle. But at our present technology, all it has going for it is that it sounds quite cool. Hydrogen powered!! 🤘

                • Hypx@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  You need grams of platinum. It is not a big deal. And not all fuel cells need platinum.

                  All EVs are as green as their energy source.

                  Toyota and Honda have not swapped to a 100% BEV fleet. It is currently what is in vogue, and everyone invest in it. But like the diesel car, that does not imply it is the future. In reality, BEVs are still a niche product and current demand is entirely created via subsidies. The current wave of BEV excitement will not last beyond the end of those huge subsidies.

                  Most criticisms of hydrogen cars are just marketing from competing technologies. You shouldn’t believe them. In reality, hydrogen cars will be the cheaper type of EV, and the fuel will plunge in cost. It is the same story as what happened to wind and solar.

                  • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Okay, but why should I believe you? When any source other than you disagrees?

                    And kind you, like I said, maybe in a few decades hydrogen will be a cool tech. But even ignoring the inherent downsides like greenhouse gas, losses during conversion, issues with storage and handling, we are probably decades away from a usable solution for production, too.

                    At present, a hydrogen vehicle comes out slightly to moderately worse than a petrol car for the environment while also costing the user significantly more. Can that change? Sure! Will it? Dunno, do you? Mind you, meanwhile BEVs provide a solution that is mildly cheaper to run and moderately to significantly better for the environment. We have a solution, we should use it. If in 40 years or whatever things look different, well, then that will be the case.

                • intensely_human@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Wait do you spent all this time denying that hydrogen is going anywhere then in your last sentence admit that in 40 years it might be a default mode of transport?

                  What time frame did you think we were discussing?

          • Player2@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Battery vehicles were made the hot item over a decade ago by Tesla… The real evolution would be to get rid of car dependency altogether

            • intensely_human@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              Not sure if that would be an evolution. That would be like a sea sponge saying “the real evolution would be getting rid of multicellular structures”.

              Car dependency is a new thing, and it’s also called “using cars because we vastly prefer that to not using cars”.