Toyota CEO: "This New Engine Will Destroy The Entire EV Industry!"
Vložit
- čas přidán 4. 04. 2023
- Toyota CEO: "This New Engine Will Destroy The Entire EV Industry!"
Toyota is cooking up something new in their garage! And it's not just any ordinary vehicle. We're talking about a brand new, revolutionary hydrogen vehicle! So, you may have heard about the Mirai, the hydrogen-powered Toyota vehicle that uses fuel cells to generate electricity. But now, Toyota has come up with something completely different. They're calling it the new hydrogen combustion engine.
In today's video we look at Toyota CEO: "This New Engine Will Destroy The Entire EV Industry!"
Subscribe for Toyota, Tesla, and Ford. Inspired by Velocity, FRAME, and Tech Space.
Inspired by New Toyota CEO Reveals Hydrogen Combustion Engine | Shocks Industry!
Inspired by Inside Billions $ Japanese Factory Producing Futuristic Toyota Hydrogen Cars - Production Line
Inspired by Toyota's New Hydrogen Engine SHOCKS The Car Industry!
Click here to subscribe: bit.ly/3GAIVaa - Auta a dopravní prostředky
Really hope this works. ! As a teenager I heard that HYDROGEN was going to power our future, with no problems - it was just 10 years away. I am now close to 70 years old and have heard every decade of my life that HYDROGEN is coming to our help. It might be just 10 years away.
Similarly, being born and raised on the Florida Space Coast, literally watching the beginnings of the US Space Program (NASA) become what it is (and what it is not), I believed we would colonize the Moon and be on Mars by now. But, at age 60 I'm still waiting for all of that to happen.
We really delayed and messed up our opportunities for further space travel advancement when we started the space shuttle program and stopped going to the moon.
@@pottedmeat3235 The thing is there is a new space race going on with a lot of exciting development in this field last 10-20 years. While the Space Shuttle used hydrogen as its propellent, most new cutting edge rocket engines are switching to methane instead because of a lot of the issues that also will show up in hydrogen cars (although a lot of them are different because in rocket engines you need to chill them to be really cold and they are used as propellent rather than fuel).
@@pottedmeat3235 Technology doesn't exist to make space viable. We should concentrate on what we can do to fix problems before we make more. Humans are both intelligent and Forrest Gump moronic.
They will be saying the same thing when you are 140... :)
Also on the 10 year hype cycle for almost a century now are flying cars, robots, and starting a bit later, fusion.😊
@@pottedmeat3235 can thank the democrats, their Chinese allies, and their global warming scam.
Every 5 years I hear about how great hydrogen cars could be...... Yet it's never happened
The climate hoax cult will never let it happen. They need control and 15 minute cities, not clean air and freely moving citizens.
I been hearing this in the popular mechanics magazine since the 2000s
I had a high school chemistry teacher who said it was the future in 1986.
That's because it literally can't happen... since hydrogen compressed to 10k psi still has only 1/10th the volumetric density of gasoline, and ends up being lower energy density because of the heavy tank. If you wanted the same range as a normal car you'd have to tow a 150gal tank behind your car...
@@Wingnut353 WEF funded conspiracy theorist 🤣🤣
Japan has invested billions in hydrogen technology and nationwide hydrogen fuel infrastructure. They are fully vested and on the cutting edge of hydrogen energy “sustainability”. Their vision, investments and hard work is highly commendable and should finally prove whether hydrogen energy is a viable and smart investment for others. Certainly hope this works out well for them (and everyone else).
There’s a reason the majority of the Japanese output is banned from the US market. It’s the same reason that they bent over the Big 3 and loaded them like shotguns in the 80’s. The are fantastic engineers with a total dedication to quality systems. Without a seismic mind change domestically we are only able to compete by legislative restrictions.We can do better, but want to seems to be the missing ingredient.
Yes, the hydrogen infrastructure is very much a 'Japan' thing....
I doubt they'll bother to sell many outside of Japan, it will be interesting to see how the japanese experiment goes.. :)
And they will keep going because they don't have other big energy corporations paying politicians to protect their interests.... the highest bidder like we do here
Japan's invention and creativity are just on another level
I think the most significant thing we should care about is how to find efficient way to storage H2,which can help to improve the use of hydrogen energy.
Stanford Ovshinsky patented a fuel tank for hydrogen which needs no high pressure tank at all.
Why is this never mentioned>
Impressive how you manage to leave out almost every single downside of this tech.
They always leave out the downside of EVs too.
This is a puff piece, not even remotely close to serious journalism.
They didn't.
What are the downsides? They mentioned highly flammable and some toxic fumes.
Worse. More cars are the last thing we need. More roads, more infrastructure, more taxes. Green is great but individual cars are unsustainable.
If Toyota gets this engine to market i just hope they will make it affordable.
It'll have to be expensive at first. If it catches on, the price will slide... and if competitors spring up... we're in!
It won't be affordable.
It won't because when a hydrogen tanks ruptures and hydrogen mixes with oxygen in the air you've created a bomb. A big one.
To get an idea about its power, search for 'Fukushima hydrogen explosion.'
To make a hydrogen tank safe, it has to be build so heavy that it will lose all benefits compared to a gas engine.
And you'll need a lot of energy to split water into hydrogen and oxygen to start with.
it will be affordable, people just need to support it first.
@@epicinatozifier8943 There's next to no chance of that.
If you were and early adopter EV driver, in the event that you were running low on sparks you always knew that push comes to shove you could get down on your knees and beg at a building somewhere to plug you vehicle in and hand over a bit of cash.
As an early adopter of a hydrogen powered vehicle, you can't even enter the market unless there is a hydrogen pump near your house. Then every journey HAS to be to somewhere else that has a H pump. Their has to be a huge Hydrogen infrastructure already up and running before anyone except the truly adventurous will ever buy a car.
This would be awesome! I'm more curious to know more about roadside accidents though, what happens when your car is hit from another driver or driver error? How easily repairable is the car? with current combustible engine cars; parts and panels can usually be replaced or beaten out. Will there be highly flammable leaks if there are car accidents? even it is a minor accident?
When I think about the amount of car accidents and collisions on the roads these days, I think safety is definitely the no.1 concern when dealing hydrogen 😅
All combustion engines are based on exploding the fuel in a controlled manner. If we can mitigate the storage risks of hydrogen (which we can technologically) then they really are no different.
@@aries6776 Yes, the hydrogen tanks are armoured. Designed to withstand a crash.
I wrote my mechanical engineering thesis on the hydrogen combustion engine 12 years ago. Glad to see real investment into it.
I wrote one yesterday on chatgpt, we’re both glad
@@matthew-005 The answer is in the video you are commenting on bro.
@@Kelticfury Yeah I was reading comments while watching bad habit.
You got job of professor or lab attendant
Clearly you know nothing about the true scam of hydrogen. Most likely you were given a pass in mechanical engineering like most people today.
I can see this technology first being used in large commercial trucks. They travel long distances between refueling and truck stops could provide a hydrogen pump, or two. They also have a better structure for protecting the fuel cells.
Hyliion Class 8 Trucks
This is waste bro... Hydrogen vehicle people won't accept it because price for fuel are controlled by government... EV is best bro Mercedes already having 1000 km for single charge range, 1900 km range also going come in 2027 (BYD company is doing it)
@@stepheng3703 Well in Japan, they rely heavily from outside souce for fuel , it make sense for them to create their own source of energy to run vehicles. Its nothing to lose for them to experiment with it
JCB are already building plnt vehicles that run on hydrogen, they developed their own engine as BEV i simply not practical.
As for fuel contol, making your own hydrogen is pretty easy using you home electrcity - when Honda did their FCV (fuel cell vehicle) trial in California they provided a home hydrogen generator. The problem is that hydrogen fuel cells are about 50% as efficient as BEV's (so double the cost to run), with the increase in price of energy, in the UK electrcity is so expensive that theres only a few % (10-30% )saving over ICE, a hydrogen car would be typically more expensive to run than an ICE.
@@stepheng3703 good luck getting batteries in 5-10 years.
Toyota are doing the smart thing by pursuing all avenues of energy usage. Some countries are better at using battery cars, some are better at using hydrogen and hybrid is useful in many places as well. Here in Australia we have large distances so anyone that lives in the country areas would be crazy to choose a battery powered car, a hybrid is a much smarter choice. I personally wouldn't consider a battery powered car until they can do at least 1000km (620 miles) and take no more than 20 minutes to charge, I have a boat and towing with a battery car drops range a lot. Toyota is considering the entire world including Africa as there is no way to use a battery car in most of the the countries there, no fast charging system. Providing poorer countries with modern efficient transport options is far better for the planet than ignoring them because they don't fit with your expensive battery cars that need a lot of new infrastructure to implement. Good job Toyota.
ありがとう！
Yes, diversity is good...
I wouldn't ever buy a hybrid myself, for selfish reasons, I don't want a car with the extra weight of an EV and the hundreds of moving parts of an ICE car... Worst of both worlds frankly...
EV cars will be cheaper than ICE cars in a decade or so, they just need quick switch batteries or graphene batteries to solve the charge time issue...
@@EveryoneWhoUsesThisTV EVs will still be out of reach for much of the world as they still won't have access to the infrastructure needed to run them in a decade or two. Car charging will still be slow once better batteries come out as they will have to replace every fast charger with an even faster charger that will inevitably cost even more. The chargers can only charge as fast as they are designed to charge, better batteries won't change that and the enormous costs of replacing chargers will ensure it won't happen quickly. Larger hybrids are lighter than larger EVs, you can directly compare the F 150 EV vs F 150 Hybrid and the EV is several hundred kilograms heavier but still has only half the range of the hybrid.
@@Martian74 Hybrids have the heavy battery pack of the EV and the high wear parts of an ICE engine... EVs and ICE cars only have one or the other, so overall hybrids get the worst of both worlds, that was my only point. A particular hybrid being lighter than an EV isn't consequential...
A hybrid with a half-sized battery pack has half the range on electric, so you will just get stuck using fuel a lot..
Most EV charging is done at home.
People who can't charge at home aren't as likely to want an EV because they have to care about charging stations which won't get faster to match the batteries for some time...
The infrastructure to run an EV is a driveway with a power point...
@@EveryoneWhoUsesThisTV I prefer not having any compromises, with a hybrid you get an EV when you only need a short trip and you get the far larger range of an ICE vehicle. A hybrid is lighter than an EV and has equivalent range of an ICE. Short trips with battery only are just as efficient as an EV and longer trips are more efficient than an ICE vehicle. Hybrids are win, win right now.
Most people don't agree using hydrogen vehicles.
One of the biggest disadvantages of hydrogen energy is the cost of producing and storing hydrogen. Currently, the process of electrolysis is relatively expensive and energy intensive. Additionally, hydrogen is a gas at room temperature and must be stored in high-pressure or cryogenic tanks.
Correction: it's not about saving the planet, it's about saving humans.
Correction: it's not only about saving the planet or humans but also the automobile industry. Yes, the automobile industry...
@@keepsnbits Exactly - the planet has no feelings - we r about halfway through its life cycle - only another 4.5 billion years to go before the sun blows it all to smithereens.
The real issue is the human population which has multiplied eight fold to over 8 billion people in only the last 250 years - we need to start finding new planets to branch out to fast!
It’s not about saving anything it’s a money making venture by a few
George Soros disagrees
Think you meant enslaving humans
They're taking a massive gamble. Currently creating energy from Hydrogen takes more energy than you have to put in. This has always been the problem that no one has properly cracked yet. In theory it sounds good, Hydrogen burns cleanly in the car, but the vast amounts of energy required to create the liquid hydrogen in the first place is the hurdle.
You can make most of surplus of energy that is produced by renewable energy during the day and produce hydrogen by electrolysis.
Currently Solar Power is ridiculously cheap and it is projected to become 4% cheaper every year.
Hidrogen can fix the surplus and deficit problem working as a battery.
@@sebastiaogomes6662 Except that currently, they're getting the hydrogen from fossil fuels because it's cheaper.
@@zorkmid1083 If we're being honest, a lot of people are charging their electric car with energy that is derived from fossil fuel. I know this can theoretically be fixed in the future, but right now for a lot of people it's exactly the same as your example: their fossil fuel electricity is cheaper.
Also, most ressources needed for batteries are acquired burning a LOT of fossil fuel as well as creating a lot of other environemental issues.
@@zorkmid1083 Depending on where you live right now. But indeed you are right we still have a long way to go until we have more blue and green hydrogen.
@@pier-lucgaranddion1527 Electric cars are powered by whatever the grid is using, or it can be powered by whatever the owner has set up. That's a lot harder to do with hydrogen. And while batteries have a large up-front cost, generating and transporting the energy to the battery, again and again, is much more efficient than with hydrogen.
Hydrogen was a possible solution before electric cars became much more efficient. Now it's a dead end.
When I heard about being better I can't help hearing peel&key saying
Dint be sorry be better lol 😆
Many people say, "We've been hearing about hydrogen engine dreams for decades.
And the AI industry is no different. Until last year.
That '90 second' refuelling time is going to be the killer punch for EVs - add the fact that it being relatively straightforward to incorporate such refuelling systems into conventional petrol / diesel filling stations, and you've got a win / win situation.
Another point re. EVs made by Toyota's boss is this; although the price of EV batteries has been falling, thanks to the costs savings from increased production numbers, the price of the required raw materials - like lithium - is rising relentlessly. If increasing numbers of EVs are built, then the cost of lithium will continue to rise, with inevitable impact on the price of batteries for new build *and* 'end of service life replacements' - and, unlike hydrogen, which can be produced anywhere, lithiulm deposits are where they are. If the producing countries decide to jack the price by 5, 10 or 20%, battery makers will have no option but to pay up, and raise the selling price of their batteries accordingly.
But there are promising batteries on the close horizon that don't use lithium. Batteries are getting better all the time.
@@IanSmithCA like?
Sodium-based batteries hit market recently and should appear in budget cars in next 12 months, Chery and BYD already signed up for that.
Here in Longview, TX, a company called Capacity is building "Yard" or "Spotter" trucks that are used at docks and big logistics trucking facilities, that run entirely on hydrogen. They are hoping to see them used at the big shipping facility in Long Beach, CA and elsewhere. They sound odd when starting up but when running, they seem no different than an semi truck.
Can you answer in more detail?
Back in 1963 in the UK, they did away with the intelligent milk delivery system (Silver the horse and his cart). That horse would walk up the street itself while the milkman did the deliveries. They replaced poor old Silver with an electric milk delivery truck. So we've almost come a long way since 1963. That's progress at a human scale. The downside is no free manure for the roses.
That's because Toyota didn't want the supply chain of internal combustion engine components to collapse, so they developed an engine that uses the same components, while the ev is completely different in components.
Yea, that's why Toyota built a 70 Billion $ electric vehicle manufacturing plant to make all Lexus' electric.
The reason the USA is moving to all electric is because every single EV in the world depends on China for the materials to manufacture the batteries for them, and if China doesn't like your country anymore.....no more battery material for you, and your automotive industry, the largest industry in the USA, comes to a screeching halt. Do you believe your politicians who favor EVs don't know this? Of course they do. If they know this, why would they be in favor of it? What is the only possible outcome? Why is THAT outcome their goal?
@@klubstompers the lexus brand is under Toyota obviously they are still 2 separate cars lol I mean Lexus and Toyota. Is there a Toyota LFA? or a Toyota lc500
Same company but obviously one will be electric it's business
No. Toyota made this because of common sense. EVs will render obsolete billions of vehicles operating combustion engines. This Hydrogen technology has the potential of converting all our gasoline engines into hydrogen-powered vehicles without producing an ocean of metal and plastic waste as we decomission combustion engines and replace our whole automotive fleet.
It always been the best solution on paper, however we still didnt have the safe and reliable technology to support that.
We wont be able to produce batteries and EV cars forever as the environmental footprint of digging out lithium and cobalt is not only massive but the ressources are very limited.
@@BruBrusmayhem Agreed, we would be better off running Ford flathead v8s till the gas ran out. Rather than using exotic minerals in batteries, that cause heart disease (Cobalt).
I hope that the Toyota Aygo eventually gets an H2 edition, as it's a phenomenal little car.
At least we know what kind of engine the new Supra might use, which is super exciting. 🤯
I Like hydrogen powered more bc it means we can keep the nice engine noises, manual transmissions, and maybe even the option to retrofit old engines
Toyota's stubborn Hybrid vs world's EV is similar to Sony's Betamax vs VHS. Both are good techs and thanks to respective marketing support, both have loyal users. One of the main reasons Toyota chose H instead of EV is to avoid their dependence on Chinese battery manufacturing.
Toyota's stubbornness is because they do sales in markets that are in no hurry nor have big incentives in electric cars. Indonesia, Philippines, India, South America, various African countries. Toyota has a line of EVs. If more markets want them, production will increase, but Toyota is not going to give up markets where there is no demand for EVs.
@@quantummotion I beg to differ, sir. Indonesia as one of Toyota's biggest sales contributor is very aggressive in facilitating and supporter of EV. The country's abundance in nickel makes Indonesia a strategic country within the EV ecosystem. Truth of the matter today Hyundai and Wuling have much better and faster inititatives in Indo EV market. Toyota evidently and purposely did not pursue.
And China is now unstoppable ;)
EV combined with solar will be unstoppable, even crossing the desert
Each fuel type has the niche we already have propane running forklifts and Taxi that can be converted to hydrogen. It won't be very many notifications other than country. And should be banned did any locality that uses coal to generate electricity
@@JediMaster21 First, your comparison is bad because it implies that Toyota is the Betamax to the rest of the world's EV, which VHS. Regardless of how well hydrogen does in the rest of the world, it will surely succeed in Japan, itself, because of supply and demand. 2nd: That "main reason Toyota" statement is inaccurate, or at least not the whole story. The Japanese government and industry is doing a 180 on nuclear power now due to energy shortages - going full in. The new nuclear plants they're rapidly approving and building will produce HYDROGEN as a "free" byproduct!
I really believe in this technology. Can’t wait to see this in all commercial vehicles 👍
science is NOT about belief
@@manuelsarmiento1464 100% it is. If you do not believe on making thinks right you’ll never start. If you don’t believe something will change the world you will never push to the limit. If others do not believe in your technology they will never buy. Welcome to the technology world mate
It is already.
@@manuelsarmiento1464yep. Millions believe in the climate garbage.
@@TekyForce your wrong,
Facts work!! Not ideas.
We know what works let’s continue improving, that.
Didn't ever thing the engine was the problem with hydrogen, but storage of hydrogen being the problem.
Need infrastructure. The thing is, if this works eventually, you can be in and out in 2 to 3 minutes so a 'station' can handle 20 cars in the time an electric is charged. That is absolutely amazing.
Would love to see this technology incorporated in boats they are some of the thirstiest machines going around.
Get a sail boat
@@brainretardant I own a yacht, that itself also runs on a diesel engine, you don’t get wind all the time.
@@brainretardant Technically 🤓 some Cargo and Passenger ships are currently equipped with a Rotor Sail to experiment it's viability.
You mean cargo ships?
Plus boats are usually not involved in high speed, high impact accidents and if they are, there's usually not a bunch of other boats or people who would perish in the event of an explosion.
The problem with hydrogen is the energy required to produce that hydrogen. Hydrogen is the most abundant element but it’s almost entirely bonded to something else. From what I understand it take about 50kwh to make 1kg. That will get you about 100km. That same power could get you near 200km in a regular ev.
it's just energy conversion from electric to hydrogen, some other similar efficiency conversion happens in electric cars, but hydrogen wont deplete in freezing cold unlike EV's charge dies quickly. Soon enough the Hydrogen pathway efficiency will get closer to EV's, but will not require so many special metals to manufacture like EVs.
The power density has a cost for sure, but I suspect this is the future for all long-haul driving. An electric semi truck makes zero sense, but a hydrogen semi makes perfect sense.
And the same energy would get you 1000km in an ICE vehicle.
@@operator8014 Unfortunately Hydrogen is a terrible solution for long haul. The size and weight of a tank big enough to hold enough high pressure hydrogen makes the trucks allowed carry weight almost useless.
That should read "one of the MANY problems of hydrogen is....."
What is the frequency of oil changes? I imagine with water being the exhaust, it ust contaminate the engine much faster. What are the exhaust sytems made from?
Right on Toyota! I trust the Japanese will get it right. Yamaha and Yota are two of the best at creating amazing motors. Now one area to pick is the explosive concern. I'm sure Toyota took every safety measure to ensure the vehicle is safe.
Once you realize that the transportation sector responsible for the 15% also includes ALL logistical solutions, it is not hard to follow that red thread a bit and do some calculations. It includes everything, from the little motorbikes in India to your average car, to any size truck & trailer, and it ALSO INCLUDES the huge transoceanic cargo ships that run on a fuel so dense (basically waste from the petrol industry) that it needs to be heated up before even being used in the engine.
Once the above is understood, it doesn't take long to realize that the biggest issues come from the logistical sector of trailers & freighters and less from the private transportation (which makes up somewhere around 3-5% tops). And yet both the car companies peddling EVs and governments, prefer to push it on the citizens to change their cars to an EV they can barely afford - which ironically creates as much toxic waste and gases as a modern diesel engine car generates over 120.000 km.
So I guess we should rather ask ourselves what is the most effective point of actuation here: the private transportation sector of people who are just trying to get by and can't afford a car change (and changing the whole car park of e.g. Europe or USA would take decades anyway) or should we perhaps look to reduce toxic waste and emissions in the sectors that produce the most - and where therefore the smallest % change actually has the biggest effect. That would be the trailer, freighter and logistics sector if we look at transport; but it would especially be the steel and concrete industry, which is responsible for a whooping 30% (!!!) of carbon emissions worldwide.
So just for comparison: changing the entire (!) private transportation sector to carbon emission free cars (which EVs are not, because in production they generate just as much if not more than ICEs, specially due to batteries), would reduce 3-5% emissions - which is topped by advancing technologies to reduce steel and concrete industry emissions by just 1/6 !!
Which is a more realistic scenario? Reducing emissions in industry, or changing the worlds entire car-park?
Thank you, I was looking for this comment ❤
It doesn't have to be either or.
EV's are coming, like it or not. Their price is already starting to come down. Add in the savings of running costs and maintenance, they are already more attractive than an ICE vehicle. Battery recycling/repurposing will become mainstream.
Once FSD is switched on globally, it reduces the sheer number of vehicles required. It's all happening quicker than most people realize.
EV too quick… will not have the power to charge them all. Plus all the other things with batteries and electric heat and cooling they are pushing. Climate is what Mother Nature has been changing for millions of years.
@@alessio5713 "Cars and vans accounted for about 8% of global direct CO2 emissions in 2021." - International Energy Agency. So basically that comment is garbage. Steel and cement solutions are still in R&D, sure, but the first solar steel smelter can be googled up right now. All these sources need replacing. Pointing that out does not change anything. Whining about BEV while it is still more expensive than gas cars is ... OK. But the whining will not age well. 2023 was the earliest prediction for when BEV becomes cheaper than ICE. For Tesla, that day is the Mexico factory + ramp, so about 2024 earliest or more likely 2025. Or earlier if the cheap Chinese cars make it here sooner. Meanwhile you can now buy a Tesla for less than the average cost of a new car. And if you can afford that, it is cheaper to run than a Corolla over 5-10 years.
Well said. EV's have been begrudgingly accepted by the fossil fuel conglomerates because of their inherent weaknesses and their differences to fossil fuels. Hydrogen is a game changer because it can replace fossil fuel in every way imaginable. The only reason to keep fossil fuels over hydrogen would be cost... but cost would come right down if we invested in it.... economy of scale.
I love my Toyota! Approaching 300K miles and still runs great!
still polluting with poisonous gasses. Time for an upgrade.
@@davidc2838 you willing to pay for his new car David?
@@davidc2838 wow, are you trying to sound condescending ironically? 😐
@@davidc2838 get bent,tree hugger.
@@davidc2838 what color is your toyota?
My first go-cart was a 6volt starter motor and battery. It didn't get far but sure was fast. As a 'Car guy' most of my life, I find the combustion engine more trouble than it's worth. I'll miss the sound as I do with the 2 cycle dirt bikes. But the costs to gain HP are far too expensive. Engine repair is out of most average owners hands. And today's complexity introduced further failure points. Reducing the drive train down to quickly swap-able parts is a win in my book.
LZ 129 Hindenburg: Am I a joke to you?
Toyota + Yamaha, match made in heaven
LFA is screaming in the background
4age 20v And 3sge beams 💪🏽
Toyota and Honda released these vehicles in CA in 2016; They were on a 2 year lease. A close friend had one, but hated that he had nowhere to recharge the hydrogen. The 75PSI pumps near him (only 2 in the South Bay) were constantly down. Like EV's there just isnt an infrastructure to support Hydrogen production or pumps. Develop a Hydrogen engine that runs on tap water and you have something.
Tapwater engines already exists. Google it! Inventors are all murdered, dead or gone.
They will never do that .. look at new Zealand hydrogen vehicle program...
Hydrogen engines work by adding oxygen from the air to the hydrogen in the engine - this process releases energy that power the car. The waste out the exhaust is clean water. The energy is added to the whole thing, when you spend energi (from solar or wind, hopefully) to split tap water into oxygen and hydrogen (H2O) -> (H + O2). Hydrogen is then stored, and the oxygen released into the air.
The trick is getting the combination process to work in a small enough unit that can fit in a car, and that is not made from super rare materials that are insanely expensive. There are working car with these engines, but making a brand new infrastructure that can put hydrogen into a car takes time and a LOT of money. Money that is hard to get back as noone has hydrogen cars yet, that noone has because there is nowhere to fuel it... *sigh*
Better yet, we need a car that runs on garbage.... Oh, right Doc invented that in Back to the Future.
@@finxn77 Did you not watch the video? I feel like I'm in the twilight zone. Are you guys all shills from the fossil fuel companies? They specifically drew attention to the fact that this latest vehicle has a much smaller fuel cell unit, hence not expensive to produce. Yes hydrogen infrastructure needs investment but that's the only reason it's not happening...
Where does the H2 come from and how much energy is required to provide it?
A maintenance free EV isn't to be replaced by another maintenance nightmare ICE. The consumer market is going EV. For larger applications needing less frequent distribution centers this might fly. My buddy owns an EV and has left oil / transmission maintenance in the past. I'll be following him.
Thank you.
Australia NRMA road services have recently indicated a net work of EV charges all over the continent. This means similar to petrol stations you could be only 150klm from a charger at any point. Currently the coverage is still adequate but improving each day.
Hydrogen stations are currently in Canberra, one in Melbourne, one in Sydney. A huge amount of work needs to be done, as EV sales have already doubled from the first year EV were made available.
All new technologies are brilliant that give us environmentally clean transport, we all wish Toyota and others great success in the future.
The lack of public Hydrogen refuelling stations is not an issue. We saw this back with the introduction of electricity in 1900, telephone exchanges in 1930s, mobile phone base stations in 1980s. Wi-Fi in the 2000s. In other words if it works the infrastructure gets built.
Electric cars already have the infrastructure. That’s going to be hard competition.
@@sean2susini it's expensive, slow and impractical for large scale mobility.
Toyota is already late to the trend.... Electric is the future... here is Norway is the new normal. Always full in the morning 😉
@@manoelnt0 Except it isn't? The infrastructure for 90% of people's EV charging needs has been running through their house for a century. Charging times have made massive strides for road trip style commutes in recent years as well. Hydrogen would have to offer actual benefits over both traditional ICE and EV while offering meaningful future improvements as well. EV benefits aren't even close to just being about the environment.
They are shutting them down, standing hundreds of people who got suckered into hydrogen.
I hope this works out so that the future isn't solely EVs which either make no sound or try to mimic the sounds of an ICE car while it doesn't feel the same. Not to mention this should skirt by the arguments against EVs about how much pollution gets added to the environment due to nickel and lithium mining.
and they told me we would all be in flying cars by now when I was a kid. not holding my breath
I have the greatest respect for Toyota as an innovator. I can only hope that they know something about the future of commercial hydrogen production and storage which has escaped my attention.
This is a joke, right? Toyota has never been innovative.
Hahaha then you dont know about the white slaves making their cars n truck.
Ever heard of the Prius? Toyota’s hybrid technology has set the industry standard. Not to mention their engine technology was far ahead of their time.
@@adameckhardt115 - I’m afraid that you missed my point.
I need it for door dash
The problem is storage, hydrogen has a very low density, hence for a reasonable range you need huge tanks or dangerously huge pressure to keep it in the tank
Graphene!
Yes, dangerous pressure is the direction they go with. This isn't all that unheard of. Industrial gas bottles tend to be around 2500psi. The problem with H2, however, is that the molecules are so small that they tend to permeate everything they come in contact with. They leak out from even the most tiny imperfections. But, wait, there's more! H2 also reacts with metals to make them brittle. Perfect when you want to run an engine on hydrogen.
@@CKidder80 So basically, that awesome new powerful, environmentally lovely car you spent probably $500,000 on and can't find any fuel for is going to wear out in a year?
But that would be the real "Gas" instead of calling "fossil liquid oil" as gas, retarrrted western calling liquid as gas lol
@@cjmarcel-uz3ym combustion engines based on the Carnot cycle have much lower max theoretical efficiencies than electromechanical engines. Plus battery performance and costs are improving very quickly. It's a no brainer this hydrogen tech is dead in the water. Legacy automakers like Toyota and Porsche are trying to hang onto their historical advantage in ice tech by trying to use hydrogen and efuels etc. But if you do the numbers it's clear these variations of old tech are not cost competitive. Theyve simply been disrupted by the new kids on the block
With as many cars that are the roads, I can only imagine the humidity increase in major cities in the South
Except the efficiency is leagues behind EVs.
You could produce electricity and put it with only minimal loss in the battery of an EV and convert nearly all of it into motion.
Or you use electricity to produce H2 at a terrible conversion rate, stuff it into a tank and use it for a combustion engine that will convert modt of the energy into heat and only a smaller part into motion
The pure energy need if such an engine per mile is several times higher than that if an EV.
Therefore this is only interesting for fields ehere large batteries are not an option. Like planes and maybe commercial trucks(although, do you really need such extreme ranges when a truck driver has to do mandatory breaks anyway?)
Love it. The fact that it requires much less rare earth elements is huge.
Sodium Ion batteries go into production this year. no more rare earth elements.
@@dylanadams1455 true but sadly they have less energy density so will only be used for large batteries not in cars
A BEV requires 0 rare earth metals. Not in the future but today. The only batteries that require rare earth metals are the nickel metal hydride batteries used by ..... TOYOTA .... All others use Lithium ion batteries which require not a single gram of rare earth metals!
@@lauriebradingmunn3764 The Chinese manufacturers cracked that nut and are only slightly behind in volumetric energy density. So they are going to be viable in cars.
@@dylanadams1455- LFP batteries also have no rare earth or cobalt. And are already in many vehicles.
I’m curious on what the cost would be for the consumer if the system needed repairs. Having less lithium and nickel is a good sign though!
Toyota always had a reputation of great quality vehicles. They always strive to be the best!
Not as much as replacing the entire lithium-ion battery after a few years.
"I’m curious on what the cost would be for the consumer if the system needed repairs."
Not to mention, what will the cost of hydrogen fuel be to the consumer? I'm guessing it's not going to be cheap, despite it being the most abundant element in the universe.
Way higher than ICE and magnitudes higher than EV. Not only that it uses the same maintenance intensive ICE cars have almost forever, now it adds an extremely dangerous fuel storage. There are some videos around where such gas tanks (natural gas) in cars pop for no reason, absolutely obliterating half the car. Now imagine that with more inflammable and explosive H2. If you would use H2 in cars in a large scale you will need a test center for mandatory checks, that check the tank and all pipes at least annually. czcams.com/users/shortsQZ2oveLNZo4
@@hkiajtaqks5253 little do you know. Modern batteries hold up to 300000km easily.
Even if this works exactly how Toyota is claiming, EVs are still the better technology. By the time you build this hydrogen generating station, you could have just used the renewable energy to build a DC fast charger. This system sounds just as complex as an ICE so you don't save on maintenance, and you lose the ability to wake up to a charged car every day.
Toyota hydrogen is a 'Japan' thing....
Other countries won't have much opportunity to buy or use these, only Japan is making a serious H2 infrastructure to back it up....
Most of the world will just switch to EVs
The issue with hydrogen is that it doesn't exist in it's free state on earth. You have to "make" it by stripping it away from water molecules (not a great idea in drought prone California) or stripping it away from hydrocarbons (that's oil). Either way that takes energy which you have to create from other sources. So all hydrogen winds up being is a transmission method for energy produced elsewhere. Like copper wire conveying electricity.
They keep on with the hydrogen bandwagon with out telling the reason it’s not viable for personal transport. It takes 50kw of electricity to produce 33kw of hydrogen at its most efficient method (67% efficient), plus storage, transport and then converting it back to electric again all with losses. Add to that building an infrastructure to supply it will increase the end costs too. Battery Electric drive is still needed plus the hydrogen fuel cell plus a complicated combustion engine. The advantage of battery electric is its simplicity.
Yes extremely inefficient
@Peter smith it still takes 50kwh of electricity to produce 33kwh of hydrogen that doesn’t change, the logistics get cheaper with larger scale but it’s still much more efficient to put that 50kwh directly into a battery.
This is basically Toyota saying that they don't want to be in business in a few years time, sad.
Facts:
1. Hydrogen combustion engines are around 37% efficient and that is a physical limit (stationary fixed diesels may make 50%
2. A car with a hydrogen combustion engine and a similarly sized tank will have a range of 50miles. To get ~350miles it will need a tank 7 times the size which is the boot and the rear passengers gone.
3. Hydrogen combustion engines make NOX if they run off atmospheric air.
4. NOX is a green house gas
5. NOX creates acid rain.
6. NOX is banned in the EV change over time frame
7. Hydrogen is around 4 times the cost of gasoline.
I suggest having a watch of this video czcams.com/video/vJjKwSF9gT8/video.html that goes through all the maths although it doesn't cover the NOX issues.
This video has some of the issues of hydrogen covered from a physicists stand point czcams.com/video/Zklo4Z1SqkE/video.html.
If a physicist and an engineer both say it's not a good idea then seriously Toyota is dead.
Well said.
Excellent. And there are points
This is without covering the BS being said in the video.
"Rare materials like Lithium"
"Hydrogen stations normally implement easily with gas station" and more.
Lithium is one of the most abundant materials in the universe - and in earth too.
Hydrogen requires special station that are totally different than gas - you can't even begin compare them. Gas stations have a few special features for safety since the fuel is highly-flammable, but it's basically a water tank.
Meanwhile the Hydrogen is highly-compressed, and so it requires totally different stations that can deal with such compressed gas. How can you claim a liquid station is very similar to a highly-compressed gas station is beyond me.
Also things like "we all heard the horror stories of electric but here it's fine because it's 90 seconds", dude - what horror stories? That people didn't find a charging station? Oh excuse me, I forgot that I can just go to the nearest hydrogen stations which is just a few thousands of kilometers from me, you know - a simple walk in the park, I'm sure the amazing range of this vehicles would be good enough.
And it's much better than going to the several charging stations that are just a few kms from me and they cover all of my country - or better than, you know, freaking charging at home.
If you somehow get stuck with an EV away from a fast-charger - you have a mobile one in your trunk that you can plug into any home socket existing on earth - basically you can charge everywhere there's electricity.
What about Hydrogen? What can I do if I want to get on a trip without a Hydrogen station or basically to 99.9% of earth? Nothing.
And one final crucial thing - everyone can basically build fast-chargers, since it's mainly needs to get connected to the grid (for even faster ones you need more serious chargers that convert to DC, but there are enough companies that do that and they only need to create the stations).
To build a Hydrogen station, you need very expensive and hard to manufacture tech for it to be somewhat self-contained, or supply it all the time with more Hydrogen...wanna know how most of the Hydrogen gets mined? Unlike what is claimed in the video - most Hydrogen isn't being mined in a very green way...they are mined using the oil from oil companies, that's why the oil companies push for Hydrogen and not electric.
Who would've thought that Hydrogen is actually oil in disguise, huh? Certainly not this channel, or maybe even he knows yet he chose to lie.
@@tomi832 Sorry, I'm puzzled as to why you would reply to my post?? I am in total agreement with you 🙂
@@tomi832 So this is the link to the other video (by Dr Cameron Jones) which at 7:40+ shows a paper on the subject of methylene blue and photobiomodulation to target neuro protection.
The refueling process is a bit of a pain. Can be hard to get solid connection. You have to pull back a metal sleeve on the hose nozzle and push hard to get it seated to your car. Then release the sleeve. The pump tests this and it may take a few tries to get it right. Pumping is done at pretty high pressure. And it is hydrogen. Remember the Hindenburg airship disaster? That was hydrogen. But I would consider it if there were pumping stations within a reasonable distance. I am not driving for 100 miles to fill up.
Noticed they glossed over every potential problem, it’s not better it’s just different. It still pollutes, fuel is explosive and will be difficult to ship and store, engine is much more complicated to build and maintain then shown and will cost a lot more money to manufacture. Besides it’s been looked at before and dropped because of potential problems and cost.
It wasnt said about the biggest disadvanage of hydrogen cars. It requires above 2x more energy to driver the same distance than electric car. Another problem with this movie is, combustion hydrogen cars were showed as something better than fuel cell. Fuel cell is better in almost every aspect. In electric car about 90% of electrical energy from grid is used to propel car, in car relied on fuell cell it is about 40-50%, in combustion hydrogen car it would be belove 30%.
it would be more like 10%
Hydrogen cars wouldn't require the huge environmental damage of lithium mining.
@@Tao_Tology one of the most common metals on earth. Do you worry about the coal and oil needed to produce almost 10x the energy needed for a hydrogen powered car rather than putting it directly into batteries?
@@salerio61 wondering if you know whether if produce the hydrogen with renewables, is there still this coal/oil requirement?
Jacek Mierzejewski Electrolysis takes quite a bit of electricity to make hydrogen from water. You also have to factor in the energy and pollution to transport any fuel (including hydrogen) to millions of gas stations. Electricity is easy to move through powerlines essentially instantly. Fusion technology has made some huge progress lately and it will supply more clean energy (electricity) than all of the world would ever need.
The first ICE using Hydrogen was developed by Swiss inventor Francois Isaac de Rivaz in 1807, from the 1960's to the 1980's many Hydrogen vehicles were produced by major car companies such as GM, VW, BMW, Mercedes, etc.
Yes, the only hold back was the lucrative oil business.
@@logicalmusicman5081 100% Correct !
That's funny I just wrote a comment saying they been had this technology under wraps until forced to have to adapt and use it. Free electricity cures for diseases and so much other things are being suppressed
Yup, and they say new technology 😂
Our roads will start to be wet or worst flooded... 😅
Sounds good, sounds great, also sounds like the future for automobiles. Lets hear for Toyota!!
Funny how in one breath it says it just emits water and then in the next points out that a number of noxious pollutants are produced by the hydrogen engine. The main barrier to this technology is that the energy economy of producing hydrogen rather than just using the electricity in an EV. You need 6x more electricity per mile burning hydrogen.
True, but they never mention that fact.
Yep. This video just sounded like an ad for Toyota.
Everyone knows this. Yet there's no way to provide enough electricity for 100% electric cars only unless you fill your land with nuclear power plants, which can't even be built everywhere. Therefore coal plants will have to be used as well, which outputs more emissions than these cars would. Meanwhile hydrogen from nuclear power plants is unused. Toyota never claimed all cars should run on hydrogen. They think that the future is in both hydrogen and electric cars and they are right - only EVs and only HICE cars are two unsustainable models but a mix of the two, depending in the country and the local conditions, is an achievable goal.
@@danielhalachev4714 sorry but in the U.K. the National grid has calculated there will be no problem in powering an all EV system. It need s about a 20% growth, back to the capacity there was not that long ago. Suggesting we’d need to cover the country in Nuclear stations
is just being silly. To get such silly figures you have to assume all EVs are permanently plugged in the the fastest chargers, as I said silly. Also remember we’d need between 3 and 6x the capacity to run hydrogen cars.
@@iblack585 The UK is not the world. Developed countries are a minority and not even all of them can handle the situation. Also, I don't want to be rude, but the UK is bad at calculations. Brexit was a complete disaster, Truss was a complete disaster and your current government isn't rosy either - you had a limit on how many cucumbers you could buy. Let's hope they calculated the EV electricity demand right.
It works like this: we use 100W electricity to make about 80W equivalent of hidrogen, then we use 80 W of hidrogen to produce about 50W of electricity to run an electric motor. How is that a good strategy ? And here is not even taken into ac ount the storage and distributio which also cunsumes a lot more energy, even compared to traditional fuel. ... this is physics -can't cheat it.
exactly
Do you think we are getting 100% out of fossil fuel? No. A combustion engine is about 50% efficient.. so sa.e thing really with less pollution
Rewrite this. You’re better than that. Use grammar!
If energy plants techs can improve with time (and they will) to generate hydrogen more efficiently then it will be a much more reliable and eco friendly solution than the silly lithium/nickel/cobalt battery vehicles.
Hear me out on this. That seems about the same efficient as a power plant delivering electricity though the grid. I think the most efficient power plant is 60% through a turbine. Then there’s loss through the grid. If they can produce most of their electricity on site, that would be cool, but who knows. I do see your point though.
I want this as it makes sense. Nice one Toyota.
Brilliant - I have wondered why the automotive industry went for all-electric cars and not Hydrogen.
I guess for the same reason why the US gov went all for Ethanol (even though it takes more energy to make a gallon of ethanol, and ultimately from fossil fuels, than there is IN a gallon of ethanol): corruption/bribery.
Probably because hydrogen has a very low energy density. It might makes more sense for smaller cars, such as for japanense markets, but not for other markets.
Producing H2 for energy use seems to cost a lot of energy though..
Depends how you generate it. Thorium?
You should see hydrogen as a way to store solar energy. Creating hydrogen costs energy as does charging a battery. If this is solar energy, which is trivial easy for both technologies, cars using either batteries or hydrogen will drive on solar energy in the end.
@@martijnb5887 iirc combustion of hydrogen is much more inefficient than batteries. Not to mention the conversion loss from electric energy to hydrogen has conversion losses as well.
@@mr.mirror1213 Correct, but it matters less if you have a near infinite supply of clean energy.
@@ivs721 have you watched the video?
I am glad to see this engineering marvel and wish that these motors available to common man at an affordable price. Also let me know about air engine I heard about it few years ago.
I wonder if some racers or cars lovers will try to make a smaller version of this and put it into their street or classic and see if it works. If this does work then this is the main car maker to do battle with Tesla.
Those lads on the Toyota production line gave me Andor flashbacks to the fellas building parts for the Death Star
I think the more option we have, i'll be good for consumers - traditional combustible, EV, hybrid, and now this would be fantastic. Let's go Toyota!
Not sure if the word "destroy" applies here but it as another option.
But people don't know about how the combustion engine is inefficient. I cannot believe that hydrogen combustion can be a substitute for the electric motor.
EVs are a goner especially when you can create a high performance car with different variety of piston engines... nobody would've cared about EVs had it not been for their touted environment friendly tag and the hype Elon Musk created for himself and also, part of the appeal is the sound of the engine which is pretty much non existent in EVs.
The sound that comes from combustion engines is the sound of inefficiency. Rather than applying the energy from burning fuel to increase the speed of the car, the energy is simply thrown into the atmosphere, resulting in a huge sound. You can get better sound using loudspeakers, and with far less energy too
Electric cars on the other hand, don't waste energy by vibrating or making noise while being still.
@@frank4425 well, it is what it is... Especially for high perf cars, people do expect that vroom and generations of conditioning won't change that easy despite the facts.
In the 1980s, MIT (I think it was them.) had a program on NOVA (PBS) that was doing the same thing except with converted gasoline engines. It was quite interesting.
Duel fuel autos are notoriously unreliable and problem prone.
I know, as i used to convert cars to propane.
Hydrogen equiped with crabonfiber tanks is the sweet spot.
Carbon is not pollution. It is what plants breathe.
May I suggest that before the narrator wets himself, perhaps he should check out the efficiency, or rather inefficiency, of the hydrogen combustion approach.
Ev's may be more efficient but the user experience and logistics of recharging is a nightmare, particularly long distance with short ranges and that is what matters to buyers.
@Steve Zodiac
I would agree with you in part. EVs are very convenient for people like me who commute to work every day and have a garage or a driveway to recharge at home. I get up in the morning and the car is ready to go, like magic. I never have to factor in extra time to wait in line at Sam's club to get gas. I never have to get an oil change. I never have to pay the dealer to do scheduled maintenance, because there isn't any. And in my experience, the EV is a great way to make longer trips, like Chicago to Ohio. But almost 16% of Americans live in apartments and for them, EVs are not too convenient. You are going to have to make a weekly trip to a Supercharger and most Superchargers follow the highways.
So is hydrogen the answer? Sadly, no. Running a car on hydrogen is like finding $300 on the ground and immediately setting $200 on fire. You need electricity to make the hydrogen in the first place, more electricity to compress it to 10,000 PSI for storage and the fuel cell is not very efficient either. As a result the overall efficiency of hydrogen powered cars is in the 23% range, Which means that you are going to need 3 times as much electricity to run your hydrogen car than your neighbor is using to charge her EV. And charging an EV can, in most cases, be done at home.
Unless there is some breakthrough, which could happen, building an EV charging station will always be cheaper and easier than building a hydrogen charging station. Driving an EV will always be less expensive than driving a hydrogen car. EV charging stations will always be more numerous than hydrogen charging stations. And the range for hydrogen cars isn't that great either.
I would like to thank you for the manner of your comment, which had a better tone than my own.
problem with this solution is the engine's thermal efficiency will be around 33%. That means at least 2x to 3x more solar and wind turbines required to fuel these suckers. Looking at the entire supply chain, it doesn't stack up.
ya think things may....evolve?
@@theberserker5077 No. The laws of thermodynamics do not evolve.
If green hydrogen will be 2x or 3x more expensive than electricity, then that simply means H2 cars are not feasible. Nice try Toyota.
@@harrynikken Well, If you cannot use the "green" energy the moment its produced, its as good as never produced. So you can use the worthless green energy to make hydrogen and store it for later use. And with price of bateries and if you consider pretty much all of them are made in China, hydorgen is way to go.
What happens in winter? Will the water thats coming out freeze and damage components?
Students in Switzerland have recently built an EV that reaches 100 KPH in just under a second. That’s more or less instantaneous. And in Holland, students have built an EV off-roader that has covered nearly 1000 K s across North African deserts, powered only by sunlight. The end of EV’s ?.......I don’t think so somehow
The main problem that they will have to overcome is that it is energy expensive to produce hydrogen
Electrolysis. Solar farms to convert solar energy into electrical, then use that to convert water.
@@Qwentar That's potentially a huge number of solar panels which are not all that green anyhow. Takes a lot of resources to make the panels which eventually end up in landfill.
Fusion power would solve the problem!
And that a combustion engine also lose A LOT of energy to heat
@@Qwentar- you might want to read up on that. Eletrolysis of water is quite inefficient, you use a lot more energy than you can get back from the hydrogen. Especially if you also use a combustion engine instead of a far more efficient electric one.
@@Qwentar Why not just plug that solar farm into the electric grid to recharge cars?
That is even more inefficient that fuel cells - how can they think that is a good idea
fuel cells are really expensive
Bc efficiency becomes less relevant when your fuel isn’t as expensive or harmful?
@@ob1kendobe But still - if you need several times more electricity to generate the hydrogen to drive for 1 mile than what you need to do the same with an EV - it makes no sense. Even without considering the cost for building a hydrogen distribution network everywhere. Also it is very likely that in just a couple of year's EV’s will be cheaper to produce and to run.
@@kenwittlief255 no they aren't. The expensive part of a fuel cell vehicle is in the storage and handling of the hydrogen, not the fuel cell itself. Hydrogen combustion engines don't make any sense - fuel cells are more efficient & more reliable and electric motors are more responsive & powerful.
The only way I'll buy one is if they made it a Plug-In Hybrid ev/hydrogen. That way I can charge at night like my cellphone and have full charge for next day. In case of extended range or charging outside hydrogen convenience kicks in.
Question, how to create more o2 if you used up more o2
Re; Hydrogen, when I first got to Boeing as an Aerospace Engineer I asked propulsion in their newsletter "with roughly 70 years of fossil fuel left, is propulsion looking at an alternative fuel source?' Replied "we continue to look at Hydrogen". Toyota remains a pioneer in breakthroughs like this. Also our Boeing leadership has long studied Toyota's manufacturing methods with positive feedback. 1 cool thing too that stood out on the Toyota tour was " at Toyota each employee writes an average of 300 improvement suggestions every year".
hydrogen is not a solution as evs are and they will never be the only thing hydrogen vehicles do is delaying inevitable change same as Toyota trying to push for hybrid cars aging delaying inevitable change
Hydrogen makes more sense for aircraft, as the supply issues are less of an issue and weight is more of an issue so batteries at present don't cut it. There are relatively few airports, so adding H refuelling equipment is practical. Trying to build out a hydrogen infrastructure for cars is more of a problem, huge cost when initially there will be hardly any customers. It might have some utility if used in hybrids so only need hydrogen refuelling at motorway stops. EVs had a huge advantage, because when they first appeared, they were still viable to some people even without any public charging, as you could charge at home. Then the number of cars reached critical mass where public charging was financially sustainable. This can't happen with hydrogen, unless there is some cheap way to make it at home.
Hydrogen is great but the problem is the btu by volume. I was in those studies at Boeing. Want to talk about nuclear and space lasers? Those were scary studies.
70yrs left. hahahahaha
I still have an environmentalist book written during the climate crisis of the early 1980s (which was 10x worse than the current one for all the modern day scaremongers, a bit of global warming is NOTHING compared to acid rain and the ozone hole crisis).
The predctions then were - we would be out of gas by 2000, out of oil and uranium by 2020, and out of COAL by 2030.......
This has been around for a while and I think the experts said setting up a hydrogen filling stations in the uk just wouldn't work,I think they said the size of the hydrogen storage stations would have to be enormous, I also read that it all the UK Went electric, the national grid wouldn't cope,🤷🏻♀️
The uk isn’t in a great position in regards to surplus power for EV charging. And hydrogen will only be a cost effective option if companies can buy the electricity cheaply enough to produce it. So hydrogen can realistically only succeed after we sort out the current infrastructure issues affecting the ev market. And at that point, will there even be a market for hydrogen vehicles? We should be pushing to convert current cars to run on ethanol for a short term solution while we research and invest time into carbon neutral petrol that the likes of Porsche are doing.
@@AGreyGoatyou have to make ethanol by growing vast fields of crops to process into fuel. Brazil did it by destroying forest to grow sugar cane to make fuel. It's a bad idea.
The grid would melt. Uk doesn't have the capacity for everyone to go electric. It's a big scam to generate more money from tax.
Size of hydrogen filling stations? At 30 mpg you need 45 litres to do 300 miles. 5kg of hydrogen to do the same. The hydrogen is compressed as a liquid. Surely that doesn’t take up more space?
@@Growly_Man the problem with compressing it to a liquid is that it has to be stored at a ridiculously low temperature. Therefore the gas has to be vented to atmosphere when the tank reaches a certain pressure to stop it from exploding. This causes another issue where you could be away from the car for an extended period of time, and return to it with no fuel as it’s all been vented to atmosphere
i would need to drive 500km to a hydrogen gas-station to fill the tank
Totally hope to see a multi passenger vehicle.
The problem is hydrogen distribution logistics. Its hard. Which is one of the primary reasons these probably wont take off.
Power can be distributed through conventional HVDC transmission, and then converted to hydrogen at the refuelling station via electrolysis. The benefit to electrolysis plants is that economies of scale are less applicable to the water splitting, and more to the manufacture of the electrolysis cells themselves, leading to smaller mass-produced electrolysers located close to the point of end use.
@@PetrolDemon I can charge an EV at home.
@HAL Japan's power grid is already near full capacity. Hence, you see japanese companies moving to more than Evs
@@HAL9000. Which is absolutely necessary since it takes half an hour to do so.
@@zebrasusdarkness8810 producing hydrogen requires power too, and it’s not as efficient as just straight up using the electricity.
"its not about being different its about being better>"
perfectly said tbh
I have 1.6l dohc geo prizm. No turbo charged. 4 cyl. How they make new 1.6l with only 3 cylinder? Sound like it will go as fast as my geo.
5 kg of liquid hydrogen is about 19 gallons or 70 L. The cost today for liquid hydrogen in US that amount would be between 12 and $15 per KG (~$65) to fill up so you can go 300 miles you’re getting about 19 miles to the gallon for comparison.
I'm here for the 8 into 1 headers! This engine looks nice.
Correct if I'm wrong but it was shown in this video that nitrous oxide (N2O) is a resultant pollutant of combustion in traditional fuel burning in internal combustion engines. It is Nitrogen Oxide (NO) that is the byproduct being referenced.
Is using the planets water source to power vehicles globally a receipt for disater? Maybe I'm missing something.
The only thing we need to know to know if this is truly an EV killer is the efficiency. How high is the efficiency compared to a relatively modern fuel cell?
Since they don't mention it, it's bad.
Exploding hydrogen: 25% - 35%.Hydrogen fuel cell: 60%. BEV 70% - 90% in 2020 according to VW which frankly is real bad at BEV. Oh and let us not forget all the electricity used to pump, compress, operate exploding gas stations, etc. Hydrogen cars are literally a scam by oil companies to syphon off money that could be going into BEV R&D, and thus maintain their oil profits a few years longer.
Evs are evil and very bad environmentally
Hydrogen has 16 times the power of gasoline. You make it by splitting it with electricity, you can use a car alternator.
@@jimmime That's what the world needs, a perpetual motion machine! Oh, wait........
Actually, production and shipment of H isn't all that easy nor cheap.
As for a combustion H engine, as much as I would love that to work, it seems the autonomy is, here again, an issue. Hydrogen leaks pretty easily and takes a lot of room.
This is a fake AI generated video, that's why it is not making any sense
it's still a bomb on wheels...
it may work in some applications but I'm sure it will be highly regulated!
The problem with Hydrogen combustion engines is that hydrogen fuel cells exist and they're twice as efficient. Hydrogen fuel is also about 80 times more expensive than Gasoline...
I made a hydrogen fuel cell about 15 years ago. Stainless Steel plates, with a 3/32 gap between them, positive, and negative plates, I used 12 of them and went from 23 mpg to 46 mpg. Small plastic tank, if it POPS, no big deal, the gas burns up almost instantly. There are a few adjustments you must make, like timing, and the engine runs cold so you need to make some mods there as well, lots more power! Instructions on how to make one an adjustment are online. LOL, most nowadays don't even know how to change a tire. Enjoy your life, and learn how to do things.
What a Muppet thing to say online lol
@@alicetango6725 Are you a hand Muppet?
How much electricity did you use on that magic hydro car?
@@kevinp5119 I used the alternator on my car, between 30 and 40 amps.
If you have air conditioning, you have an alt that will put out over a hundred amps, usually more.
I love how the first reccomended video after this one is a breakdown absolutely demolishing the viability of the engine shown. Unless the H ICE somehow manages to have drastically higher effeciency than the gas version (and the usually trend lower) you would need to basically have most of the vehicle be filled with H2 tanks to carry enough fuel to achieve a reasonable driving range.
Now that's a car I 🚗 will buy as soon as I can get one or 2!!!!!!!+yes
Can it run on traditional fuel if no network is available?
JCB in the UK have also developed a Hydrogen ICE for it's heavy plant, easy to forget that their are many deasil powered commercial vehicles that are not suited to being battery powered so swapping the the deasil engine to a Hydrogen combustion one is probably the way forward..
Yes I have seen some videos on JCB front end loaders etc. They are a cool company.
Those are some lofty goals by 2025. Does anyone know how hard it is to transform old combustion factories into hydrogen facilities?
In addition to this I think there needs to be an analysis on how much this will actually cost? If the best in class EV’s are now cheaper than your average car, it’s going to be difficult to incentivise people to pay what is likely to be double.
I wish Toyota well with their testing and hope it can be something that can be put into the market. Even better, as is the clip have a manual gearbox to go with it.
It is a stretch for me to have an auto trans let alone an electric car, I eagerly wait for more news.
Anthony
“I’m telling you foreman, the government has this car that runs on water, dude”
Please tell me how close is the hydrogen fueling station is.
I first read about this technology in, I think 1980 or 1981, Omni magazine. It was the cover story for that issue and it made it appear it was some lone American engineer pushing the frontiers of automotive transportation. Like this video, it too minimized some of the downsides of the technology in favor of promoting something people hoped would be an improvement over traditional internal combustion engines.
The following issues of Omni magazine had letters to the editor claiming there was a Big Three Automaker conspiracy to derail any further investment in the tech (speaking in terms of financing and engineering it).
It would be nice if they could make this work. Nicer still for the investors if they can make it cost effective. Then there is the question as to how the government will tax us for hydrogen use. Once revenue from taxes on fossil fuels begin to diminish, how will "we" make up for the loss? ... These roads and highways won't finance themselves...
Tax it just like they do gasoline (maybe at a higher rate if less volume is needed of course)
i read about sodium reactors back in 1950,,got banned.. no weapons grade material..
Don't worry the FEDS will tax charging stations just like gasoline. Bet money it ends up costing as much or MORE per mile to charge your EV as it does for gasoline now.
@@wilsonrawlin8547 There is no sign of that yet what we do have are states charging extra for registrations and taxing charging.
@@wilsonrawlin8547 Generally most of the tax comes from the states, the Federal tax on gas hasn't been raised in 20 years. A more equitable way to tax in order to fund road improvements and maintenance would be to tax mileage instead of fuels, as the fuel consumption to miles driven calculation has been skewing quite a bit. This will be increasingly necessary as people shift to distributed power generation (solar) and home charging. I support this, despite driving a Prius and having solar power for my home.