The V8 Engine that Runs on HYDROGEN
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 сен 2024
- We love combustion engines, there’s just something about them that electrons and circuits can’t match.
However, we’re not delusional (mostly), we know that we can’t burn dinosaur juice forever.
But - we may be able to hold onto them, just with a few tweaks. Namely the fuel.
Ford has patented a new, turbocharged, HYDROGEN-powered engine.
It’s an interesting idea. Surely hydrogen isn’t a straight-swap for petrol, will this actually work??
The most common type of hydrogen-powered car uses a fuel cell. You know, like the one James May has.
But we don’t like these as much as they are essentially EV’s but with an on-board power source. No noise, no climbing through the revs and definitely no shifting gears.
Dull, if you ask me.
Compressed hydrogen gas is fed into a fuel cell which converts it into electrical energy rather than burning it.
The process isn’t as complicated as you may think.
🔴 Follow us!
📱TikTok - / drivenmediatt
📸 Instagram - / drivenmediaig
⭕ Toyota's INSANE 3 Cylinder Engine
• Inside Toyota's Insane...
⭕ Audi's Engine That Runs on Vegetable Oil
• Making Engines Run on ...
🔴 Would you like to be featured in a video with your car? Submit it here 👉 forms.gle/ZWMf... 🏁
Press enquiries: press@driver61.com
#V8 #Engine #Engineering
5:48 to be clear, hydrogen is not burned in hydrogen bombs.
was looking for someone to point it out. Its important to remember that hydrogen floats up really quickly, so the car would not be covered in flames like happens with petrol sometimes, which just fload around the car and burns everything
Nor does it burn more Rapidly then petro like the way EV batteries Do Burn! plus not to mention we WON'T BE MAKING ARSENIC POISON out of the unrecyclable water from lithium mining to make China the battery OPEC people which is what the greatest polluting country in the world is wanting and Some No-balls government's are in china's bought & paid for puppet control
I pretty much just turned off the video after that. Who needs a dislike button.
instead of a hydrogen bomb, it will be more like the Hindenburg, still extremely dangerous though
@@RudyRydz69 Believe in JESUS today, confess and repent of your sins. No one goes to heaven for doing good but by believing in JESUS who died for our sins. For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.(John 3:16)❤️😎
Enging
Also Hydrogen in Hydrogen bombs and normal hydrogen are very different things. Normal hydrogen doesn't undergo fusion reactions spontaneously. It needs a fission nuclear reaction to kickstart that process. Yes hydrogen is dangerous. But Hydrogen in gas tanks and in Nuclear bombs shouldn't be compared.
I am mean petrol is dangerous too,
You need a fission bomb to get the pressure and temperature high enough to fuze deuterium (Hidrogen with an extra neutron) into Helium. Sorry, it's not strictly necessary, but it's the easiest way currently known.
Edit: There is a couple of other ways. Have so much of the stuff that its own gravity creates the pressure. (temperature comes with it) That's called a star. The other known way is with strong enough electromagnetic fields. Like in ITER.
@@sikertsok225 this one ^^^
Campared
Also, I like Pizzas.
If we are worried about explosives in cars then why do you do anything. Your computer could explode whenever it feels like. Your car can explode if it gets bored and if you have a hybrid or phev your car will explode then explode again. But no one worries about explosives in anything because we make it safe.
I heard somewhere that rotaries run great on hydrogen, so the brappy bois might come back sometime. I'm all for hydrogen combustion engines.
They achieve peak thermal efficiency when they have a fuel that doesn’t pre-ignite or detonate, but when *is* ignited, burns very quickly. So it needs properties of both a diesel and petro fuel.
@@captainobvious9188 That does match hydrogen though. Hydrogen has higher self-combustion temperature than gasoline (500 vs 230 degrees celsius) and burns quick when ignited.
Mazda already bringing it back with hydrogen
They still break and are stupid
@@KCJbomberFTW no arguments what so ever....just another ICE hater, and EV jerk of person
I'm sorry but I'm not very confident about Ford. They have already embraced the EV bandwagon...if we see anyone doing anything with hydrogen engine it would be Toyota or Porsche if the Efuel is not feasible
I am because it is viable for sports vehicles. Like in nascar, so that you can hear the sound. I think we will definitely see it there.
Ford hasn't embraced EVs if you read what they have said, EVs are just for compliance and plug in hybrids fall within what they have said.
I would love if Ford went hydrogen! hopefully its still feasible for them because the Mach E is a joke.
@@mashedt8rs290 u think 314 miles of range and the third highest selling electric vehicle of 2021 is a joke? Or are you one of the individuals that can’t get past dilemma about the mustang branding…?
@@wr8thbeatz322 Yup! Call it anything else but a mustang and all is good
Turbocharged
V-8
Hydrogen powered
Enging 😍
We want normal engines but with green emissions and most importantly a green way to produce these fuels or energy sources. Lets hope for the best !!
If you burn, you do have emissions because the chemistry reaction; think of a match that you light up, it will be transformed in to carbon by the time the burning process ends; that's science and nothing will change that...
@@krisg.4257 but while burning hydrogen you get H2O so water as emmisions. so no issues.
@@SimonBauer7 not quite
You have less emissions than if you had a petrol v8. I can't wait for the hydrogen v8 as it satisfies the needs of eco people and us petrolheads
@@krisg.4257 Wrong... you need to understand science. Go and do some chemistry, psychrometry and stoichiometry and you will learn. If you burn Hydrogen in Oxygen you make Water (there are no carbons)... If you burn Hydrogen in air, 70% Nitrogen, 21% Oxygen, 0.4% CO2 and some other bystanders... you react primarily to the Oxygen and 99.9999% water comes out the exhaust. Nitrogen is a bystander in clean combustion (NOx emissions are a thing of the past, before catalytic converters and injection) and Carbon is almost non-existent. If there is no Carbon in the combustion, then you cant make it!
Furthermore, if you use Fisher Tropsh process to make liquid hydrocarbon fuels from Hydrogen, you recycle Carbon in the atmosphere with a net-zero effect.
Dont make "science" claims based on assumptions, thats not science.
2 main things - hydrogen explosion by combustion and by fusion are two drastically different things. It's like comparing tnt to candle - both are energy dense, but giving off energy in an instant is governed by different factors.
Second - hydrogen has to be compressed - that takes enormous energy, and that contributes highly to losses. Storage is also a challenge - those vessels have to be isolated from temperature. Those two problems aren't as high in petrol and electric batteries. And those reasons also cause the hydrogen to be harder to adapt, store, and transport to the gas stations.
Other than that - great video.
The biggest issue I have with hydrogen is the efficiency, or better yet, the lack off efficiency. And since we can't change the laws of physics, that's not going to change quickly.
What good is hydrogen when you'll need 3 to 5 times as much energy compared to simply using a battery?
And while some people might like the sound of a combustion engine, it's still noise pollution. But wait. We are combusting. So there's more going on than just creating water because inside those cylinders is more than just hydrogen and oxygen. No matter how clean the air is you inject, it will always contain pollutants just like the engine needs to be lubricated which also causes pollutants to be burned when you ignite which in turn once more create emissions that you will be spreading all over the place.
But for those who still think it's a good idea, think about the fact that industrial hydrogen is already in short supply and expensive. Imagine if demand was to increase heavily, you know what that price will do? If you think fuel is expensive today, wait till you have to fill up with hydrogen.
At least you can fill up in a few minutes, right? Well... it depends. If there is enough hydrogen under high pressure at the refueling station, sure. But if there isn't? You'll still be spending up to half an hour to fill up your tank.
@@Hans-gb4mv You should probably look up the full cycle for an electric vehicle efficiency because it isn't much better than any other "fuel" source for vehicles right now. An electric car just starts with a massive deficit that is slowly recovered, but the pollution that you so heavily seem to care about, will likely never be made up for as the pollution from those batteries being produced is more than a petrol engine being on the road for a decade. Mind you, that battery likely isn't going to last that decade and thus will result in even more pollution. Efficiency is great, but not when it results in more pollution when that's what we are trying to reduce. The electric car idea isn't as great as everybody makes it out to be. Ever notice how as more electric cares hit the road, the price of it is climbing? So now not only do you "save" money for your car, but you just turn around and spend it on your home. The actual effective price of an electric vehicle per mile is just a couple cents under a petrol one. It just looks better on paper, because most of the manufacturers don't include everything to convince people to buy them because of the government mandates.
We knew this was coming 50 years ago and had a chance to build coastal nuclear plants to desalinate water and convert some of it to hydrogen. Now we have power shortages and water shortages and the price to build that still needed infrastructure is going to be HUGE compared to what it was then.
@@ryannelson8717 then you have been reading other studies than me. Even Volvo put out a study indicating the life time emissions of a BEV are lower than that of a similar ICE.
@@Hans-gb4mv I would recommend rereading the last sentence of the last comment as it directly mentions those "studies". You have to read the all inclusive which not a single manufacturer has done. The university studies are the ones that factor in the battery production, car production, etc.
OGs remember the V8 Enging
enging😎😎😤😤
@@roblox-vo2dk enging😎
@@communistsimp98 enging😎
Still there, hasn’t been changed
@@communistsimp98 enging 🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
Hydrogen combustion engine are my last hope for the future of car enthusiasm...
If we end up with 100% evs, I'm not sure I'll handle living without my passion
supercars and sports cars will mostly remain petroleum powered till the point that, EV tech actually becomes faster than petrol powered cars
ICE's arent going anywhere. Synthetic fuels can already be made, with methanol being an ideal eFuel for being able to be made into gasoline and dimethyl ether, which can be made into diesel. Can also be made into secondary fuels like jet fuel. All while remaining carbon neutral, just simply made from water, air, and electricity.
@@Slayer8957 what about the fact that all the processes u mentioned are stupidly inefficient compared to directly plugging in ur EV, or the fact that most of these are yet to be made carbon neutral or the fact that stuff like biofuels are causing more damage than good, for example the amazon rain forest is being chopped down to grow sugarcane for biofuel, ICE's will remain in supercars or sports cars for a while until, EVs become faster than them
@@thes7754 you're failing to realise that we will need these bio fuels, current day cars number over a billion, they won't just disappear and to keep them from being a large amount of dumped waste they need to be used
@@EmmieFloding nah, we can reuse all the metals from cars as even EVs will still need them and old cars will get replaced with new ones ev or not
"H in H bomb" is a bit of a stretch as a H Bomb is never going to happen with hydrogen fuel. Hindenburg however, would have been a much more appropriate comparison.
Exactly. Hydrogen has it's advantages, but also gross amount of disadvantages, that weren't mentioned in this video. Lack of infrastructure, high price, or generationg are really minor compared to them.
As far as i know hydrogen combusts with oxygen at 1200°C , at that temperature even Nitrogen combines with orygen which eventually makes nitric acid. Which is more harmful than sulphuric acid that petrol cars make. Real Engineering made a video on it.
From what I read on Toyota little hydrogen adventure they purposely cool the chambers and create lean mixtures to make it produce less of that stuff as it would be in ideal concentration. They then run it through a series of cats. Unfortunately this causes a lot of corrosion and requires some precious metal coating to keep it contained. Needless to say... expensive.
@@foxman105 Lean fuel mixture, means more oxygen remains unused. This combined with the high temperatures inside a combustion chamber and the nitrogen in the air makes NOx, which is still bad.
@@foxman105 Ceramics and proper exhausts to clean-up the mess are possible solutions. Still there is so much propaganda here it's better to leave this comment section alone.
Construct some type of catalytic converter that filters nitric acid instead of the other regular fuel emissions
@@thewinchester8996 they did actually use a NOX cat because of that to clean up the exhaust fumes. Also one of the reasons they overcooled the combustion chambers was to produce less NOX. It works... but it needs refinement.
Long live the Internal Combustion Enging
Good video but a few take away points worth talking about:
1. The answer to H2 ICE being an alternative as to why it wasn't scaled up before is still unanswered by a lot of the car companies building and patenting them. Burning regular H2 emits 300% more NOx emissions that traditional ICE engines. Did these car makers solved this issue and are going ahead with it? We still don't know about that.
2. One of the main reasons why EV infrastructure is scaling is because the means to transfer electricity is already in place. But what hasn't been addressed is will the current electricity grid (where I get to press some keys and send this comment to some random YT channel) that is now way beyond it's threshold designed limit from 70 years ago be able to handle the surge in demand if 99% of all transportation becomes electric? I think our politicians need to have a revisit at this and rethink their priorities.
3. Associating H2 with H2 bomb is like associating nuclear bomb to nuclear ships. I find it hilarious that we haven't even seen a major disaster occur from them and yet we are crying about how unsafe they are with no track record of them to begin with. Toyota actually demonstrated their H2 fuel tanks safety by shooting a regular pistol round at a pressurized fuel tank to demonstrate just how "unsafe" H2 tanks are. Link: ruclips.net/video/jVeagFmmwA0/видео.html
Overall I think H2 does have potential but it clearly needs more investments into it so we can unlock this potential. I also think rather than having all forms of transport being electric is just disastrous for our ancient grid. Especially if the governments also want ships and airplanes to also be electric. Clearly we need to diversify our energy outputs. It would also make sense for people who live in apartments with their cars parked outside on the streets and not have cables running down from their rooms while everyone sleeps at night.
3. I also want to add that in h-bombs the hydrogen technically isn't been burned or exploded (ie. Oxidized: h2 + 2o2 - > 2H2O) but rather fused. ( H[1/2] + H[1/3] -> He[2/2] + 1n)
This is alot different ( 2 diffrent chemical reactions) and to compare them two is not really rational and shows how little the Autor understands the processes.
yes the NOx caused you know we living on earth abundants of N2 plus of oil process of burning, not 300% AFAIK anyway.
but toyota is working also of the new catalytic converter that purifies NOx *if not mistaken japan is announces 0w-8 oil that very thinning so they can minimize the exhaust production.
1. Hydrogen sucks to make. Its expensive as balls, if you think gas prices are high you'll cry when you see h2 prices for the same mileage. Its usually made through electrolysis with water which takes a ton of electricity. (so why not just use the more efficient electrical system found in EV's, rather then an inefficient combustion engine. )
2. If 30% of cars on the road became EV tomorrow our grid can handle it (EVs aren't being adopted near that rapidly). Its been improved upon, so idk what you are talking about with a threshold. If the system was unable to handle the electricity it would be unable to. I think you need to take into consideration that this isn't a genies lamp situation and the switch to Ev's isn't going to be faster then our ability to improve upon our electrical grid.
3. Its more like associating a propane container with a nuclear generator, your main concern is pressurized combustible gasses. That said id be more concerned about reliability of those systems to not leak like crazy given a decade or two.
Potential yes, but its something we looked into pretty fiercely under the Bush administration, and theres some very good logistical reasons it hasn't and probably isn't ever going to take off. Your entire argument hinges on this "ancient grid" idea, sure the design is old but its more then equipt to handle things and its going to be a while before evs make it into the secondary markets for the people living in apartments. Plus its really not hard to add electrical sockets to the exterior of a building or to a parking area, but that would be at a landlords discretion and he may have difficulties finding tenets if he cant keep up with the times.
I am confused, How does burning hydrogen(H) release any NOx(nitrogen oxides) at all, shouldnt it just release H2O?
On number 2: think about changes in the last decade to answer that one ... did you think the installation of so many air conditioners at homes was foreseen? Do we cope with it? Is an increase of around 15% in power consumption really that impossible?
I get the whole downside of having to store compressed hydrogen gas in a car but I’d much rather have that than a battery pack that can explode into a chemical fire after a crash and burn through me and everyone around me while being nearly impossible to put out with water.
Exactly
finally a new enging!
Technically you don't need fossil fuel to make hydrogen. A nuclear power plant could do it and on top of that it could power EV's while being cleaner and safer than basically everything else.
Hydrogen, efuels, vegetable oil, whiskey, Unicorn tears… I’m down for anything that’ll keep vroom vrooms on the pavement. Keep it comin.
The H in H Bomb has nothing to do with hydrogens combustibility
lol actually, why did they even make that point? it almost discredits them.
Feel like the h in H bomb should just stand for fission-fusion Hybrid bomb. Makes life easier for everyone. Like I can’t even blame them for getting confused 😅
Done we all love the v8 enging
5:46 wow this was honestly a rather dumb thing to say... comparing hydrogen fuel for combustion to a hydrogen fusion bomb is just like... whaaaat? bruh why even put that idea in peoeple's heads? it's like showing a picture of a nuclear cooling tower and implying that the "smoke" coming from it is polluting (it's just water vapor)
1:32 it's not pressurised to liquid. That is impossible on room temperature. It's just pressurised to few hundred bar and it just takes few hundred times less volume.
the mirai doesnt produce water vapor but just water and also even tho hydrogen is flammable, it wont have time to ignite because if the tank is damaged, it empties very fast
Makes sense to me, I live in a village and don't have a driveway, so charging an electric is a virtually impossibility and a flat battery would leave me stranded miles from a power source! I think hydrogen could be a great future option for rural areas!
Believe in JESUS today, confess and repent of your sins. No one goes to heaven for doing good but by believing in JESUS who died for our sins. For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.(John 3:16)❤️😎
I don't understand this. We have a national grid. Electricity is already supplied to virtually every building in the country. Already. We will not be building a hydrogen delivery network anywhere near that extensive, just as we never built a petrol network that extensive.
The electric grid we have now cannot support 50% of people charging their ev at home. The cost to upgrade the grid would be astronomical and would have to increase hydro production as well
@@TheMonkeyfreak23 We have to upgrade the grid anyway, so the extra cost would be low. With hydrogn, first we need to build expensive production facilities, then an expensive distribution network, just to duplicate what electric is already doing, for the sake of vrooms and pops and bangs. It's not going to happen for private vehicles. Sorry.
Look to the Lightyear One, this car will revolutionise the world as you don't have to charge it!
Hydrogen would be better suited for commercial applications (freight, trucking, etc), where weight budgets, usable cargo capacity and refuelling times are high on the list of things that are important.
Come to think of it, weight and refuelling times are important in motor racing as well, so we might see F1 run hydrogen, especially if they can keep some sort of engine noise as well.
Energy freedom should allow people to use it if they want to. EV and Hydrogen will probably yield the same mpg. Hydrogen though will probably be cheaper to produce. So a passenger vehicle should be just fine using it.
Saving the hydrogen may be better overall. Being able to save energy to a battery isn’t just yet possible for long time, you can save hydrogen as long as you want. After some years you should change batteries, you can use hydrogen tanks for way more. Batteries uses hard to find sources, hydrogen tanks is simply tanks easy to source and 100% recycling.
Building a hydogen tank needs way less metals from questionable sources than a battery as well.
@@Schaddn Its just that there is no cost effective way to produce hydrogen, and that there is no real improvement, especially if you want to burn it in a combustion engine it will be ridiculously expensive, even if its made from fossile fuels, worse if you want to use electricity to make it.
Beside niche applications, electric battery vehicles make so much more sense than hydrogen.
Im not so sure about that. In order to be a reasonably dense source of energy, Hydrogen has to be stored in low temperature. Even in highly isolated tanks, the temperature exchange is a thing. That's why, even so, hydrogen is great to public transportation, like trucks, planes, or maybe busses - they use the fuel right away, as for the people with cars - well.. some people don't use their cars very often - electric cars and hydrogen cars aren't very good in that regard, especially, when they are stored outside of the garage.
You're joking right? You'll need to swap out that hydrogen tank long before you need to swap out the battery on a BEV. The tanks in hydrogen cars last about 10 years and after that they lose their certification. And hydrogen tanks are not simple tanks. Look at what pressure you need to store the hydrogen and you'll quickly see that these are not simple gas tanks. These are reinforced tanks made out of carbon, a material that cannot be recycled at the moment which is for example one of the major issues with the blades of wind turbines.
And you can't just safe hydrogen for as long as you want. In fact, storing and transporting hydrogen is a big issue because of the high pressures involved and because it can escape any tank you put it in. There is no way to store hydrogen long term.
Hydrogen tanks have to be lined with Nickel, otherwise the hydrogen escapes. Nickel is already under huge resource strain because it's the most desirable component in lithium cathodes
Dont forget some hydrogen generators are the size of a refrigerator and can be placed at a petrol station
Don’t forget that they have to be filled almost every day
@@KCJbomberFTW yeah filled with water
@@KCJbomberFTW your point being?
H2 is in its infancy, give it a few years and we will see breakthroughs. The whole world cannot run on lithium ion batteries.
And people have been saying that for 10 plus years!
Lithium Ion isnt the only option, Graphene has already been used in Supercapacitors and Sodium Ion is on the rise.
Umm, no, you don’t need fossil fuels to work with hydrogen. The answer is ammonia, which carry’s three times the amount of hydrogen than hydrogen alone. Zero emissions.
Hey here in the Netherlands there is an working prototype on pressurized oxygen car, maybe you can do a video about that
Pressurized oxygen!!!!!! Wth isn't that just a bomb???
@@AR-ix8fq 🤣
It would be quite the challenge to combust a car that runs on oxygen, with oxygen from the air. And no other fuel in close proximity.
(Unless you use the pressurized oxygen for thrust but that doesn't seem practical or efficient to me).
@@surena9451 with pure oxygen anything becomes a fuel. even metal can burn when in a pure oxygen atmosphere
@@AR-ix8fq no. Theres also air compressors. They're not bombs. There's liquid oxygen tanks. They're not bombs.
hydrogen powered combustion engines would be the dream. all the fun and sound of the engine and manual gearbox with none of the carbon emmisions.
Guys there's a spelling error, it's called the v7 enging
I’d much rather have a hydrogen engine I can refuel quickly than be stuck at a charging station. Ford, make my next truck hydrogen powered please!
Thanks for the video. One thing you can explore on another video is the fact that fuel cell although today expensive on normal road cars may be just the right solution for long-course HGVs, trains and even airplanes. Can you imagine an electric airplane with batteries? Or the batteries on an HGV that could provide thousands of miles in range? The mass production of hydrogen for these vehicles and its distribution will make fuel cells more attractive, do you agree?
They already made electric airplanes. Was about to comment something similar but decided to look it up first. EV is the future they just need to figure out the batteries or creat some type of Sifi device that generates endless energy😂. None of us will be around when that happens tho.
This video failed to point out EV's have the same problem. As for storing energy, 2H has a greater energy density than batteries. What is more, EV batteries have a terrible environmental footprint. Right now there is *no* viable way to recycle EV batteries. They are simply shipped to other countries for storage. All the marketing concerning recycling EV batteries is just that, marketing. Yes, there is research, but as yet no viable scalable way to recycle EV batteries.
You’re missing the facts… hydrogen efficiency is only 30% for its pure production.. and actually even lower than that because of combustion etc… so will be at least 70% more per kWh equivalent than electricity charging for EV’s. Plus, they require more maintenance than EV’s… in terms of oil changes etc.
Actually they are more efficient than a normal combustion engine because of the high combustion rate of hydrogen
Yeah, even disregarding all the other problems the total cost of ownership will be so high that EV's will always be more economically attractive. This drastically reduces the market for hydrogen and thus makes investments in infrastructure and vehicle development harder to justify.
@@T0NYMANUEL I’m on about efficiency compared to EV’s. And the production of turning water into hydrogen. Hydrogen generators may be good for the on demand electricity for broken down EV’s. But I don’t see a mass market for hydrogen, they’re inefficient and will be over 3x more expensive than battery tech because of these inefficiencies.
Yeah baby! Hydrogen! Basically petrol, but FASTER and cleaner!
Noisier, but hey, thats why we rev cars!
THe racing scene is gonna be SWEEEET! and the fuel can be made at home!
Hopefully some baf ass rotary engines will come into play. 11,000 rpms!!!! Vroom!
It will never be the final solution due to burning fuel. Hydrogen combusion produces a lot of NOX emissions which isnt good for the enviroment
Not a lot.... Significantly lower than diesel engines
And the whole world is only obsessed with carbon (for now)
@@pigasusr2 by the whole world u mean the general public then u are right. But the ones who makes the laws about emissions regulations definitely take all of this into account
NOx is simply a matter of heat. Heating plain air in a pressurized box will produce NOx. Gasoline produces a lot, diesel produces slightly less. Hydrogen probably produces more than gasoline, but I'm not sure. The big issue with diesel is SOx.
@@rightwingsafetysquad9872 actually it's the other way around.
Hydrogen produces the least, gasoline slightly more and diesel produces the highest amount of NOx because it runs lean.
SOx is also produced in diesel but it's a really small amount because nowadays very low sulphur content Diesel is used.
In the case of Hydrogen engine the only end products are water and NOx and NOx is very low so it's the most greenest option
The Problem with hydrogen combustion engines is that they only in theory emit just water. With the nitrogen in the air the combustion of hydrogen and air doesn't only emit H2O but also NO, which is very harmful for the environment so saying these combustion engines are green isn't true. If you want a combustion engine that is as green as possible I'd recommend green methanol. Porsche is planing on producing their own green methanol "E-Fuel" together with siemens in a place where you can produce a lot of green electricity. The methanol can be produced with filtering carbon out of the air and with electrolysis hydrogen and oxygen out of water. All of this can be done with green electricity which would mean that the combustion of the methanol is Carbon Neutral. The methanol which can be used to fuel ordinary combustion engines, runs cleaner and emits less CO2, sounds like a good alternative to petrol and hydrogen combustion doesn't it. It also has it's problems as it can't be produced in quantities the entire civilisation could run on unless the entire world could agree on only producing one fuel.
I love v8 Engings!
For stuff like this I'd like to suggest citing sources. It's never a bad practice to cite your information regardless of the topic but specifically for these kinds of topics it'd be nice to read some more.
EVs were always going to be a stepping stone imo, Hydrogen cars would effectively clean the air they use to run reducing CO² in the atmosphere creating mobile carbon scrubbers. They don't require the rare earth elements that were fast running out of to produce the massive amounts of batteries EVs require that also need replacing, Not to mention the pollution and ethical issues with getting the lithium for the batteries. Hydrogen is after all everywhere, We just need to refine the process of collecting it.
Let's just hope we can make hydrogen or Alternate fuels to quickly replace conventional fuels before EVs take over completely
I dont really like it either but EV´s will be the future for nearly everything. Only a small percentage of high performance sports and luxury cars will keep combustion engines. And those most likely just for the sound, not for the performance. Reason beeing: the production of hydrogen and alternate fuels will always need more energy than just charging a battery. So you will always have a bigger energy loss with hydrogen an e-fuels compared to standard EV´s.
So only the expensive cars will keep the "luxus" of a combustion engine. at least thats what i´m guessing based on the current direction of both vehicle types
@@nelayo4894 What happens in 2045 when lithium runs out? lmao can't wait to see the "Ev is going to take over" argument then when we have to switch to hydrogen weather we like it or not.
I'm shocked at how people ignore the consequences of mass ev adoption
@@falcongamer58 I´am by no means ignoring the consequences of that. But at the moment a good cobustion engine gets about 35% of thermal efficency. Lets be generous and consider further advancements in the ICU tech. Even if we get 50% themal effciency then we still have a loss of 50% as well. And thats after 100+ Years of research of that topic. So you would still be losing about half of the energy you needed to produce the hydrogen. If we dont come up with a way to produce hydrogen in big amounts as a byproduct then it would just be a waste of a lot of energy. Also the argument "lets produce it when the industiry need less energy e.g. night" doesnt really count because there would be easier storage solutions for that energy.
I´m not from an automotive background but from an aeromotive background so i´m just guessing, but hydrogen on a large scale will only be viable for big vehicles that have to have long ranges (ships, big planes (but maybe not even thoose because of the weight of the tanks at the moment))
Also: EV´s and battery tech havent had that much time and money thrown at it in comparison to the combustion engine so there is still a lot to find out and to make them better.
@@gamezahoy712 regarding the lithium: 1. there are ways to recycle lithium. At the moment its just less expensive to not do so and 2. there are already batterys that work without lithium.
I am by no means a big fan of EV´s or so but at the moment it just seems more likely and logical to go for ev´s. The reason beeing: Hydrogen combustion enginges are very ineficcient (at the moment even more so than normal ICU). They get a thermal efficiency of about 25-35%. Let bump that up to 50% because of research and advancments. That still means you lose 50% of the energy needed to produce the hydrogen in the first place. And that is a lot of lost energy.
The argument "lets produce it at night when the windmills are turning but industry is not needing that much energy" also doenst hold up because there are more efficient ways of storing the energy.
Furthermore: the ICU have had a lot time and money in terms of research and there doenst seem to be a really impressive step in the lines for it anymore. At least not at the moment.
However battery and ev tech hasnt hat that much of money and time spent on it yet. The steps in battery tech in the last 10 years have been very impressive.
I´m from an aeromotive background and not from an automotive background so i´m just guessing here for the automotive side. But i know which way the aeromotive side is heading.
At the moment i still think that hydrogen will only be a viable option if they can massively increase the thermal efficency of the hydorgen ICU up to above 60-70% and make the storage in the car lighter. Because of the weight of the tanks hydrogen tanks it is not yet viable for airplanes. There is alos a higher risk to it compared to kerosne (fire and pressure). Hydrogen will propably only be viable (at least thats what i think at the moment) for ships or special applications like mining equipment.
At the moment even sythentic fuels would be more likely in the aeromotive industry because you only have to have little changes to the tanks and turbines compared to hydrogen. Same goes for cars but there we would be again with the thermal efficency.
I stand by what I said: at the moment it all points to hydrogen ICU´s only being a fraction of the market for special purposes or luxury cars, most likely still im combination as a Hybrid.
Hydrogen engines do also create greenhouse gazes specifically NOx. So like with other combustion engines it will need emission reducing technologies.
Thats minimal
Aside from Aston Martin... I did remember reading that Toyota did a direct hydrogen injection and ran at the Le Man X... I think Mazda also tried it earlier before Toyota's Mirai.
So? Lamborghini also took a tractor around lemans should we drive those
@@KCJbomberFTW whats your point? I merely pointing out attempts made to use hydrogen.
@@KCJbomberFTW Stop shitting up the comments. BEV's are the worst kind of EV's and have no future. At least hybrid EV's have potential.
@@Slayer8957 you’re a joke “bev” all of them will be battery there is no hydrogen future there is no charger outside California and New York anywhere in the country there is no major investment and battery production is growing faster and getting more power dense every year and uses NO rare metals lithium and nickel only
@@Slayer8957 yup... I agree hybrids is a good middle ground while in transition. Hydrogen has a future but imo not in the consumer side more applicable to heavy industries.
As for BEV they are a puppet in the grand scheme of rehrotic. I don't welcome BEV at present cos it's gonna create problems later on if things are not in proper order.
00:08 "Dinosaur juice"
Haha! 🤣
i love v8 engings
Batteries are some of the worst things to produce when looking at environmental impact, and they have been for years, go look at the old top gear episode where Jeremy talks about the Prius production process for reference
From what i remember a hydrogen ICE is around half as efficient as a hydrogen fuel cell, so an identical tank will give a fuel cell vehicle roughly double the range. this was a few years ago though, technology may have advanced somewhat since then.
still for the average consumer increase range for the same cost will win, a case could be made for hydrogen ICE sport/super cars and whatnot.
Burning hydrogen just cannot be as efficient as using it in a fuel cell, thanks to entropy. They might be a cool option once hydrocarbon fuels die out to save the internal combustion engine, but I doubt they'll catch on because they're just a bad option
That’s the problem is battery tech can improve 2x 5x 10x even but hydrogen is already 90% as efficient as physics allow and it’s already worse than current gas and electric
@@KCJbomberFTW Battery tech cannot, or at least lithium can't. Li cells are about as good as they're gonna get right now
The Hydrogen 7 produced in limited numbers by BMW during 2005-2007 was capable of 20mpg with petrol and 5.6mpg with Hydrogen, a laugh really. Not only running on Hydrogen the 6.0 liter V12 would lose power but the range was 1/4 of running with petrol - the Hydrogen 7 had two fuel tanks and was capable to run on Hydrogen or petrol with a change of a switch.
0:08 “dinosaur juice” lmao 😂
I love engings
Hydrogen is the answer, electric is a dirty business to mine the components, it’s stress on electricity grids which can’t cope now and in time the recycling of batteries will be a major issue. The transition to a hydrogen supply network is much easier and efficient
Enging? lol cmon.
If we can keep the rotating pistons, deep burbles and shifting gears but make it efficient and even "Green" then that is an absolute win for everyone.
If I remember correctly hydrogen takes more energy to produce than you can ever get out of it, making it not "green" at all.
Yeah! Great that it was mentioned in the video.
This is such old technology that was swept under the rug. Also, just run the standard petrol engines off of hydrogen, and no compressed gas either.. super dangerous.. install a cell that’s large enough.
Enging or Engine?
on the issue the renewable sources of energy producing electricity instead of hydrogen, the renewable sources should only be producing hydrogen when the the production of electricity is way higher then the electricity is needed. Its quite often that renewable sources of energy will high spurts of energy output that the grid cant use and they just stop the wind turbines/solar panels and they producing nothing when there is no wind or sunshine. It looks to me the hydrogen should be a technology that compliments renewable sources of energy, and provide energy when wind/solar are not producing.
no hydrogen is the battery replacement, it doesnt have recyling and longveity issues electric battery now have. main energy creation still got to be primarily nuclear and maybe hydrodams, weight gravity batteries. lightweighting is great for low cost and road repair cost in tax dolar and emissiosn and natural resource sustainability etc, using capacitors and hydrallics instead of batteryies. combustion could very well be better option bc lightweighting, ,like freepiston 2 combustion chamber 1 piston version of nissan E power
I think hydrogen makes more sense in the long run. Sure it's not as efficient as straight electricity, but making a sturdy hydrogen tank will be a better use of resources than the demands for rare earth metals of EVs which can be unethical and toxic. Not to mention the batteries are just as weighty and volatile but unlike hydrogen have a shelf life to boot. There's also the suggestion that rotary engines are apparently better for hydrogen than regular piston engines as they don't pre ignite so easily. More spinny triangles is never a bad thing.
Watch this and remember my comment in 2050 once we run out of electric car batteries and lithium were going to need hydrogen in the end.
Tesla 4680 batteries are already just lithium and nickel.. no rare metals and no acid processing
@@vaeryannatha5877 hydrogen is stupid we’ll end up making fuel out of kelp and such before hydrogen stations ever become available
Electricity is ubiquitous and gas cars are ubiquitous hydrogen is neither
@@KCJbomberFTW that's a fair point, makes sense they'd want to get cobalt out the batteries. Not a big fan of Tesla especially making batteries a structural part, going to make maintenance a nightmare
@@purpleguy3000 face palms lol there IS no maintenance
that’s the whole point
the batteries are good for 1,000,000 miles no maintenance
"Dinosaur Juice." That's a great name for it. Here in the USA, there is a gas company called the "Sinclair" and their logo is a Dinosaur.
I think Hydrogen cars are the answer, Evs are too heavy and slow to charge, we should use renewable energy to make hydrogen.
Hydrogen cars are lighter more efficient because hydrogen is compressed you get more range from the equivalent weight in petrol. The hydrogen car market is in need of a visionary like Elon musk who can make this a reality.
Lol, always fun to see people think that hydrogen fueling is fast ... . It can be, but depends on whether or not there is still hydrogen under pressure at the refueling station. If there isn't, you'll be waiting longer than it takes a modern BEV to charge.
Hydrogen cars are also NOT lighter, look up the weight of those massive fuel tanks.
@@Hans-gb4mv it's always funny when I see people claim that charging Evs is fast it depends if there's electricity where you are or if there's an outage or a hurricane or a solar flair or a charging station full of cars waiting to charge when everyone and their mothers has bought one, and don't get me started on weight and range of the damn things.
This is exactly how you sounded 😂
@@Mr.Nabil.Belhaj there's no denying that nothing beats an ICE on how fast you can fill up, but don't forget tat when the power is out, fuel stations also don't work. But in the comparison between hydrogen and EVs, it will always be a toss up on which is faster.
@@Hans-gb4mv so we should diversify our choices and not make the same mistake of relying on one source
Toyota raced a hydrogen car and it sounded like a normal car.....thank god! Thats the thing I would miss the most, sound of the engine and exhaust
Then just buy biofuel…
Which is better for your engine and gives more power
@@KCJbomberFTW biofuel is quite hard to get here in the UK unfortunately
@@nickmartin4980 yeah but not as hard as hydrogen 😂
There are only hydrogen stations in California and New York I’m serious you literally can’t drive hydrogen cars in Colorado or Pennsylvania or any other state
Tesla still has their own nationwide charging grid and are growing them faster than ever
I think it will eventually work out that “historical”vehicles like ice Suvs and sports cars will make up 15% of the road 75% EV and the rest hydrogen and weird stuff
@@KCJbomberFTW definitely, hydrogen is just as hard to get here as biofuel 😄 I agree, all cars in the next 20-30 years will be EV's, konigsegg have developed an electric motor thats no bigger than your head and can produce 330bhp, of they release the rights to the tech then evs will be every where, it will be like that meme of buzz lightyear and woody "ev's woody, ev's everywhere" 😄
@@nickmartin4980 they say they’re the densest but there’s an Aussie company that showed off their new motors built for hyper loop and made a dragster using 10x new 40lb 1340hp motors
Don't forget that batteries used in EVs often require fairly rare metals that have to be mined and the batteries are only good for a few years of charging and discharging before they are landfill. They also make up a good share of the value of an EV, making one with a dead battery almost worthless. Hydrogen cumbustion engined cars would have neither of these problems.
Exactly! That's the main reason that it should be the primary choice. They haven't solved the battery problem with EVs and Musk's solution is let's build batteries faster and make more of them...
You can recycle batteries entirely
And yes every Chevy volt was recalled because a misaligned battery thing but guess what engines break too. And faster. An electric motor has 1 moving part. They ar
Er, no. You couldn't be more wrong. The battery in an EV has an 8 year warranty. That's hardly a "few" years. And only a complete fool would put an EV battery into landfill, because they're *way* too valuable for that. Older EV batteries can be recycled, and the lithium and cobalt can be recovered to around 90% and reused in new EV batteries. And it is not always necessary to replace an EV battery that loses some efficiency. EV batteries can be repaired and refurbished, at much less cost that a complete replacement. Obviously you've done no research on this subject before you posted. If you had, you'd discover that there are EV specialists out there already carrying out refurbs on EV batteries, rather than replacing them. Cleveleys Electric Vehicles in Gloucestershire, England, carried out a refurb on a 10 year old Nissan Leaf battery. It cost the owner £600 and took 4 hours. Do more research, because you are clearly very uninformed....
Hydrogen fuel cells only work on electric motor. Now raw HHO is where it's at. Any internal combustion engine can run on gaseous Hydrogen, even diesel engines & turbines. Best of all it leaves no pollution 0%. It turns back into water & oxygen.
A point missed is that H2 ICE engines have to be tuned down to relatively low power output, compared to gasoline. This is to avoid unacceptable levels of emissions. The sound of the car might be attractive, but the power and running cost may not be as agreeable.
I have noticed other car manufacturers are looking into this Mazda want to used hydrogen in a rotary engine and I saw another manufacturer had patented a design for a two stroke type of engine that would run on hydrogen. BMW who are working with Toyota are also reluctant to just only produce EV cars are also working on ideas for hydrogen use both electrically and combustion engine, remember they previously did two concept cars way back in the early 2000's to highlight the technology. A lot of construction, agricultural machinery and HGV/bus manufacturers are also looking into hydrogen combustion as it is more practical than battery for running equipment for longer work hours than full battery. The hydrogen production is also being sorted out as some of the green hydrogen projects are quickly advancing through trials and some are providing quick and cheap ways of producing hydrogen.
Just every time someone mentions hydrogen and a form of transportation together, the next word in my mind is “Hindenburg”
So... The pressure is so fucking high, it replaces air faster than it can light on fire. After that it combines with free O² in the air to make water vapor or sometimes Hidrogen peroxide.
Not sure if you know this, but gasoline burns too.
@@rightwingsafetysquad9872 hydrogen burns a lot more intensely. That’s why the Hindenburg was destroyed in under two minutes
@@shanestanton8 The Hindenburg went up because the paint on the skin was flammable. If it was unpainted it wouldn't have burned at all. Yes, hydrogen burns more rapidly than gasoline, but that doesn't really matter when you're basically sitting on the fuel tank.
@@rightwingsafetysquad9872 The Mythbusters investigated The Hindenburg. They busted the paint theory because without the hydrogen, the airship would’ve burned a lot more slowly
Enging my favorite type of power system
JCB made great progress in diesel to hydrogen conversion for their machines.
BMW sold some 760i hydrogen few years ago ... with the V12 6.0l that can run on hydrogen and gas
Highly compressed hydrogen isn’t explosive.
1.On the point of emissions, EV are not entirely green either, Even in a country like Norway, their entire push for Renewables is funded by being world's second gas exporter and top 10 oil exporter. For a country that represents like a 0. point something percentage of the population.
2. All of those issues can be solved if countries would stop being bastards about nuclear and just embrace it.
3. Its a means for storage of energy, yes, But even if it loses some efficiency there, it's still more green than the waste produced from the chemicals in the batteries, and the fact we probably cant keep building new ones for that long considering how rare some of the materials going into them are.
4. Add to that the fact ev's are uneconomical to keep going over like 10 years because of battery degradation, which Means the amount of waste just keeping increasing for ev's.
Electrolysis can make hydrogen... Australia (Fortescue Metal Groups) is making it en-masse with solar. With our geographic dispersion, Hydrogen makes more sense than EVs. Furthermore, with cheap clean energy to make it work, Hydrogen can be smashed together with recycld carbon captured from the atmosphere (still net zero) to make pure hydrocarbon liquid fuels like Octane and Dodecane (Fisher Tropsh process).
You do know that the the process that takes place in the H-bomb is nuclear fusion and basicly requires a nuclear fission to provide the requirements to start it. It is absolutly impossible to turn a hydrogen car into a bomb. Also, if I am not mistaken, the H-bomb uses deuterium and/or tritium, which is of course not what you would use in your car.
Solar hydrogen can be put in low pressure tanks for years.
It's often lost when talking about hydrogen engines but BMW made a gas or hydrogen(bivalent) driven ICE, produced between 2005-2007, the Hydrogen 7.
We have 300 years of $1 gas left if we want it
without making lithium battery production more green hydrogen will reign supreme
Hydrogen is literally cleaner than Electric cars (even with the development) that hook up to the power grid that is mostly (by a large margin) powered by petrol. It also strains the grid like California as well as most places on the world (the advancements on solar and wind aren’t there yet and won’t be for a long time) So I don’t get why there isn’t more money being put into hydrogen cars.
Regardless of Hydrogen requiring fossil fuels, but it's still more environmentally friendly than EV's. I dislike this false image of EV's being fully carbon neutral. They're not. The process of making EV batteries and not even to mention the trouble of trying to recycle or trash an EV with it's battery, it doesn't start to look as green as companies make them out to be.
Hydrogen powered car using a piston engine is the best and only key to the energy needs in place of gasoline and EV's. EV's using a battery source is a bad choice. Present gasoline stations can be converted very easily to Hydrogen filling stations. You don't have to rely on unreliable electric sources. You don't have to worry about the cost of battery replacement or disposal. I would buy a piston engine hydrogen powered car before I ever bought an EV. The only reason the government is pushing EV's on the public is because the majority of them have investments in the industry.
As long as it goes vroom vroom I am happy :D Love your videos btw!
The UK government have given £2,000,000 in funding to the UK company Clean Air Power to develop Hydrogen fuel injector technology in partnership with Ford Motor Company for use in ICE's for cars, vans and trucks in the near future😃
If any company can do it......it's Ford for sure.👏
the whole process of making a tesla is also not green. The average tesla is 15 times more dirty than a gas engine over its lifetime. We dont care about the process, just give us fun cars so the EPA doesnt bitch and whine.
what will make them popular is if they develop cheap conversion kits for regular cars. then they can start getting it popular within the car-guy sphere and the green-guy sphere while they build the infrastructure. that way they can also use these communities as the test bed to further develop the technology.
I wrote my Master’s dissertation on the use of hydrogen as a method of storing curtailed wind energy. Fuel could be produced as a by product of renewable energy. Hydrogen is aslo better as its storage is much longer term than batteries that degrade. Large scale battery storage facilities are basically defunct after 2000 cycles which is approximately 10yr lifespan.
And don't forget about how toxic it is to the environment to mine rare earth elements for ev batteries
you can also make hydrogen with another method:
Production of hydrogen by electrolysis:
What connects the processes for the electrolysis of water is their principle of splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen with the help of electric current. They obtain two hydrogen molecules (2H2) and one oxygen molecule (O2) from two water molecules (H2O) each.
Hydrogen and eFuels are the future for car enthusiasts. Tinnitus inducing EVs are for the people who hate "commuting" and think of driving as another chore.
Toyota's H2 V8 is designed with the basis that electric motors aren't reliable enough for global use, not sure how reliable is their H2 engine right now but they're aiming for its release by 2030 so they got sometime to hone it down.
I for one will NEVER buy an EV. Tailpipe emissions is just sent to power plant emissions PLUS the impact of Making and Recycling Batteries AND hogging them around (extra tire and brake pads emissions). And they sound like Tinnitus... V8s FTW!
Car enthusiasts can appreciate any powertrain, from ICEs in many pistons configurations, rotary, turbine, Steam AND ELECTRIC MOTORS! The Tesla Model S Plaid and Lucid Air Founders Edition were only possible because they are electric and no sports ICEs saloon can beat them in performance and that's good. We can appreciate AMGs, M3s and M5s, Tesla and Lucid.
Great video, sounds like VHS vs Beta debate. But more importantly - over about 40km/hr noise from cars is dominated road/tyre noise. So EVs aren’t any quieter at normal operating speeds.
And the road noise is influenced by weight. EVs are much heavier than comparably sized FCEVs or ICE vehicles.
Glad to see you folks agree with us on the mach E
Need to get rid of these SUV’s! Cars need to be smaller again especially for our British roads! We ain’t America!
This is my future a Ford 5.0 engine V8 with the Hydrogen.
I just bought a 2022 Roush Mustang and it gets better mpg than my 2016 Mustang Performance Pack. Just did the reveal of this purchase today August 20, 2022
It is S/N: 22.0001.450R yes 1st in the year 2022
The only White Mustang in all of California with the Proper 3rd Pedal 6 Speed Manual Transmission
Great content thanks.
I wouldn't buy Electric Vehicles (EV's) because there are already newly introduced EV's in unpaved Junkyards.
There are no Recycling Centers in California, and in the USA there are 5. Since not charged in the Junkyards the battery packs are dead, thus not cooling the battery packs. The heat burst the outer shell of the cells, thus, spilling Acids and or other Poisonous Chemicals into our GROUND WATER 💧 🙋👍🏎🏁
It's interesting how this patent video pops up around the same time a certain security guard dies after reporting on his own hydrogen modifications of a Ford truck...
In class we had a truck running on propane only the air intake didn’t change or anything else and it ran strong.
water vapor is one of the most potent greenhouse gases actually. but since the fuel comes from existing water, it should be okay. but a city full of these H-cars might create rain clouds!
Not good for business but what will really make a difference are legitimate aftermarket kits. Reducing gas has to be financially viable for everyone
I absolutely love v8 enging
Namx is in the action!
Here before the enging thing is fixed
Wow! I love hydrogen engings!!