_hypx

They also expected some percentage of pilots to die during development. That is no longer acceptable.

The car makers are not "democratic." It is mostly a handful of out-of-touch executives forcing everyone to go their way. A lot of is driven by the PR fallout of dieselgate too. The line workers and engineers are not on-board. Also, if you listen carefully you'll realize that most executives are not on-board either. The CEO of Stellantis have repeated questioned the direction of the BEV mandate.

And of course, they are quietly sabotaging everything behind the scenes. There's a reason why there is a e-fuel exception, and why the UK sudden moved the deadline back 5 years. There is not much real support behind the scene. I expect the BEV mandates to be abandoned in due time.

Note that FCEV subsidies didn't really exist in the past, outside of tangential subsidies that targeted at all green cars. The real target would be refueling subsidies and deployment of infrastructure, which have only recently started to happen.

What you're doing is regurgitating the same anti-EV argument used against BEVs. Remember, BEVs were at nearly zero before the mid-2000s. And compared to the ICE market, it is still tiny and mostly irrelevant. The moment the government take hydrogen cars more seriously, it will take off.

It's also worth noting that diesel got to >50% of the market in Europe before rapidly dying off. It could easily happen to BEVs too. It is not a real, organic market. It is mostly due to subsidies and heavy-handed government mandates forcing companies to make them. Take that away and the market will disappear just like it did with diesel cars.

Finally, the tides are starting to turn. You are repeat claims that in direct contradiction to the OP itself. A sign you aren't even paying attention before spamming your BEV propaganda. People are starting to lose faith in BEVs, and the problems will get louder over time.

And you're just a brainwashed BEV fanatic. Time to give up on Chinese Communist propaganda. The whole thing is a giant scam and it is destined to fail.

China is imposing a government mandate on its car industry. It is a top-down solution that is reminiscence of the Soviet Union. If you actually looked closely, you'll that there is a mountain of question businesses tried to extract subsidies from the government.

In reality, China's BEV strategy is going to be disrupted and will be wiped out. It is pursuing a dead end technology that few people want. It will only take a zero emissions technology that costs a lot less to finish off their BEV strategy.

BEVs are a dead end technology because they are far more expensive than the cars they are replacing. There is no way this market is going to survive once the subsidies and government support ends. People with brains are finally realizing that it is time to move on and towards some other technology.

You are just being brainwashed by BEV propaganda. Not only do people with a brain still believe in hydrogen for cars, that includes the majority of automotive engineers. BEVs are the weird, government mandated BS cars that few people want. If the car industry was given a democratic choice, it will pivot to hydrogen as the future.

> Nickel-hydrogen batteries can run for tens of thousands of cycles, giving them a life of over 30 years. Their use of expensive platinum catalysts kept them relegated to space applications until five years ago, when Stanford materials science and engineering professor and battery entrepreneur Yi Cui’s team found an inexpensive nickel-molybdenum-cobalt alloy catalyst for the battery that costs $20/kg.

I’m really curious about this part. The reason why this technology never took off was because of the need for platinum as a catalyst. If this is solved, it makes this chemistry one of the interesting around today. It’s durability is legendary, and it will be a game changer if it could be made cheap.

People aren't going to put up with the grid taking power away from your car. If we fear battery life today, this will amplify that problem significantly.

That's a delusional viewpoint. "Doing nothing" is absolutely on the table. In fact, it is the most likely outcome for a very long time to come. Pretty soon, you will hear about geoengineering solutions. Whether you like it or not, it will be seen as the most realistic solution on the table, if not the only one.

The moment we can make an alternative zero emissions car for less, it will probably be the end of the BEV. Cost per mile is wildly exaggerated as an argument since all vehicles will eventually face road taxes.

That is a pure coincidence.

The moment something else is a cheaper idea than the BEV, none of this matters.

Very poor visibility on how long a refurbished battery pack would last.

It's part where 270 million people charge their EVs every day and the load on the grid that is the problem. Also, ripping up tens of millions of park spacings and install all of these charging stations is not easy either. It is certainly nothing like a parking meter.

An ICE replacement is usually just a few thousand dollars. And that's the worse case scenario. Well maintained ICE cars can last for decades. A mandatory, $10-20k battery replacement for every BEV at some point in its lifetime is a big problem.

The average US car is actually an SUV or pick-up truck. But the average BEV is closer to being a Corolla competitor. A like-to-like comparison will still find a $15-20k gap in price.

Politicians in Europe are making the poor and working class bear the weight of solving climate change. This is likely to self-destruct as a policy.

Other people in this thread have said that.

A dead battery cell is unfixable. At best, you have a few dead cells and a mechanic can replace them. But if replacement cells can't be found, or too many cells have died, then it is a full battery pack replacement. This is going to be a big problem for old BEVs.

Which proves there was no tipping point! Diesel are losing sales despite being dominant at one point. BEVs will probably go down the same route. Some newer idea will drive BEVs out of the market just like it did with diesel cars.

Diesel exceeded 50% of the market and still did not hit the "tipping point." This is a purely imaginary concept with no basis in fact.

BEVs mirror the obsession with diesel cars in Europe in more than one way. It was just a partial solution with many of its own downsides. In diesel's case, the problems drove the abandonment of diesel, even though it made up more than 50% of car sales at one point. BEVs are headed in a similar direction.

At some point, the need for something new, whether it's e-fuels or hydrogen or whatever, will become undeniable. We simply won't be building millions of charging stations and place them at every parking spot. If adblue is inconvenient enough to stop diesel cars, then the charging problem will be even more fatal. We must have something that refuels like a conventional car, period.

That's Michael Liebriech, notorious anti-hydrogen advocate. He's completely wrong and not an expert on the subject at all.

This is true of all existing metal-air batteries BTW. You need to open them up and physically replace the metal.

I'm sure your personal situation is magically ideal for BEVs. But that is an anecdote and not the general solution.

Hydrogen is a lot cheaper to move around than electricity. Regardless of where you are now, it is more logical to build the hydrogen network rather than expand the grid: https://www.brinknews.com/could-hydrogen-replace-the-need-fo...

The problem is turning aluminum oxide back into aluminum. Right now, that involves CO₂ emissions.

Yes, in fact the early adopters are just normal people.

In the long-run, this will be very small. They do not have huge resource requirements of batteries. Though at the moment, these things have zero scale so repair costs are exaggerated.

We are moving past that phase. All of the broken games got terrible reviews and many were immediately abandoned after launch.