Toyota CEO: “Our NEW Hydrogen Engine Will Destroy The EV

I want to see all these technologies becoming the norm not the exception. Like to see where it's at in 100 years. Lots can happen

All these people saying I buy hydrogen over electric hydrogen cost more than to fill up a car right now if you will use electricity it would cost you about $17 for 300 miles and if you could use your own electricity with solar, it’s zero cost so factor that end before you buy a hydrogen car which cost about $70-$80 to fill up those fill ups add up

Electric motors can't deliver the raw power or torque?!? Sounds like they haven't heard of Diesel-electric locomotives. You know, where they put an electric motor right in the drive axle because there was no way to build a mechanical transmission to do the job? EVERY "diesel" locomotive, built in the last 100 years has had an electric final drive!

But the electric motor thing is stupid and retarded still leaves us motor oil electric hydromotor powers electric motors was hydrant parts and stuff it was no electricity sterilizing motor oil on stuff needs electric hydrogen cars with electric motor is powered by electric hydrant parts and feels no

The hydrogen engine is one of the greatest discoveries of this century. Electric cars are not emission free, because they draw their power from a power plant which burns coal or oil, unless it is nuclear, which is emission free.

no it won't! Hydrogen fuel cells and trying to run on hydrogen itself has been in use for years (over 15). What he's not tell you is that nobody will refuel your car because of the danger alone. Then you riding inside an explosive device, so don't get in a crash. Lastly he never told you that gas (not gasoline) fueled engines have roughly a 50% life span, so you get to spend a ton more money. Why the short life span? Gases do not off any lube internally

I think it is truly awesome alternative to the combustion engine, our environment needs it and we do too!! God bless.

Pass.

Digging into the #science of #hydrogen as a #feul
We set out to assess the current science in a paper, and find that under the right circumstances, hydrogen could indeed be part of a clean energy transition. But done wrong, it could be worse for the near-term climate than the fossil fuels it would replace.

While carbon dioxide can be a byproduct of hydrogen production, hydrogen itself emits no carbon dioxide when burned or used in a fuel cell. But when emitted into the atmosphere, hydrogen contributes to climate change by increasing the amounts of other greenhouse gases such as methane, ozone and water vapor, resulting in indirect warming.

That’s a problem because hydrogen’s small molecule is difficult to contain. It is known to easily leak into the atmosphere throughout the value chain. The farther it travels between production and end-use the greater the potential for leakage.

That much is well understood. But it turns out we know very little about how much hydrogen actually escapes from real-world systems. It hasn’t been clear because there has been no reason to look beyond basic safety thresholds — until now.

This is because traditional metrics systematically ignore the near-term impact of hydrogen and other short-lived climate-forcing agents by expressing the warming effects from a one-time pulse of emissions over a 100-year timeframe (GWP-100), masking a much bigger, more immediate influence.

There is another reason the warming effects of hydrogen have been underestimated. Until recently, every estimate of hydrogen’s climate-forcing power considered only the troposphere and not effects in the stratosphere. Accounting for both reveals that hydrogen has greater warming potential than is typically recognized.

Applying the combined atmospheric effects over a shorter, more relevant timeframe, we estimate the five-year warming power from a pulse of hydrogen relative to CO2 is 20 times greater than current calculations show using the standard 100-year approach.

And when we look at the relative warming impact from continuous instead of pulse emissions — which are more representative of the real world — hydrogen is 100X more potent than CO2 emissions over a 10-year period.

It was invented long ago And inventors was killing by oil resources owners .
It exactly describe how system can stop the progress of future development Human life is nothing no matter how clever people can be . Even killing people is not the problem in front of profit . Shit of capitalism go out on the surface . Russian show the worm in the shit .Revolution in the shit . Son they start invent pries for clean water .

Definitely this is the future, (green hydrogen derived ) liquid methanol fuel to fuel methanol fuel cell (and then electric motor without battery with way longer range and "rechargable" by refueling liquid methanol in just a minute just like any diesel engine. This is the future, better than "normal hydrogen" because methanol is a liquid fuel directly and easy derived from green hydrogen and way better usable than hydrogen because no need compression pressure storage and or ultra low temperature needed. Methanol liquid room temperature fuel is just a drop replacements in any gas station with little modification and same happens even with combustion engine but obviously fuel cell Ev gives more efficiency .