Regardless of if they're good or bad people: Gates made sense, Buffett made sense, Bezos made sense.. Musk, I simply don't get how his achievements (as significant as they are) add up to this outcome.
"the rapid pace of hydrogen advancement" makes me think of Nikola...and Hindenburg Research.
While there are still substantial numbers of naysayers, they always seem to be coming from a position of ignorance. I suspect if they actually knew about current events in the energy sector right now, and assuming they're open minded, then they should also agree that is the case. And if this is the case then yes, this is more matter of fact than speculation.
If you want to be carbon neutral, but quickly refuel, why hydrogen and not just synthetic hydrocarbons? What's the point of replacing all the infrastructure?
That said, they and a few others (Hyundai, Honda, several Chinese companies, and a bunch of startup companies), are the ones pushing this in passenger cars. So from that perspective, it's not too far off from the truth.
However, outside of passenger cars hydrogen has been pretty much the dominant topic. 2020 was basically the year that utility companies, industrial companies, heavy transport companies, and multiple nations realized that hydrogen was both doable and in fact necessary in order to create a zero-emission world. Once you start looking at those industries, this becomes much more apparently.
Meanwhile, there's been nothing of substances when it comes to new battery technology. There's always a major announcement of some kind, but it never materializes into anything real. Sure, companies continue to put money into it, and that includes Toyota, but I suspect a continuation of nothing being achieved in reality.
> If you want to be carbon neutral, but quickly refuel, why hydrogen and not just synthetic hydrocarbons? What's the point of replacing all the infrastructure?
Synthetic fuels are one of the major ideas being pursued as being part of the hydrogen society. That and ammonia, among a few other hydrogen storage ideas. These aren't ignored ideas, and multiple companies are pursuing them. We could very well ships or airplanes powered by chemical made by combining hydrogen with carbon or nitrogen.
However, the main realization seems to be that hydrogen itself isn't that difficult to handle. With proper precautions and the right use materials it doesn't leak or corrode. It can be blended with natural gas at something like 15%, and if the pipelines are retrofitted it seems like 100% is perfectly doable. It can also be stored underground in vast quantities too, similar to how natural gas is stored in salt domes and caverns. Improvements in electrolysis and fuel cell technology seem to make using hydrogen both efficient and potentially very cheap. There's a lot of talk of green hydrogen being cheaper than fossil fuels within the decade. And you'll need anyways it for industrial heat and chemical related reasons, so we're almost at the point where hydrogen is unavoidable.
There are still major issues with hydrogen containment since it can leak out of just about everything (being the smallest atomic structure) and also many hydrogen systems are used as fuel-cells to produce electricity rather than combustion for physical force. In that case, a Tesla vehicle powered by hydrogen would just have a fuel-cell energy store but still retain the same electric drivetrain.
You sometimes hear people make the argument that it's too inefficient, but from a purely theoretical point of view this shouldn't be case. Fuel cells and batteries should have very similar efficiency levels in the long run. If you buy into that concept, then it should be almost all fuel cells in the future, with other types of batteries playing an auxiliary role.
> There are still major issues with hydrogen containment since it can leak out of just about everything (being the smallest atomic structure)
Not really true anymore. We've made major advancements here, especially with newer tanks made out of carbon fiber and lined with HDPE. It's not something we have to worry about too much now.
> and also many hydrogen systems are used as fuel-cells to produce electricity rather than combustion for physical force. In that case, a Tesla vehicle powered by hydrogen would just have a fuel-cell energy store but still retain the same electric drivetrain.
They're nearly all like that. Fuel cell cars are basically electric cars with a fuel cell as the source of electricity. This is a huge win since you only need a small battery (or capacitor) for power smoothing and regenerative breaking, instead of having to lug a giant battery around.
But seriously, it's just price momentum. The best reason to buy a stock, to your average schlub, is because the price goes up.