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.😊
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.
@@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.
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...
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
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.
@@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.
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?
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.
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 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.
@@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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
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*
@@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...
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.
@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.
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.
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.
@@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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
The race is on , in a decade or two, we will see the winner. Personally I have passion for internal combustion engine, but, it's not the way to the future, who needs oils, filters, exhaust pipes, spark plugs, and all that maintenance work ??
"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. ruclips.net/user/shortsQZ2oveLNZo4
The system efficiency (well to wheel) with H2 is about 20-25%. The system efficiency of an EV is over 80% to be conservative. H2 for passenger cars is (from technical stand point) not very clever. H2 can surely be a solution for transportation needs like big air planes, trucks and ships etc., but I‘m afraid it will not save the beloved internal combustion engin.
Your assessment is incomplete, you do not take in account the method of electricity production used to recharge the EV batteries at all. Neither do you take into account the environmental or energy costs of battery creation. You also forget to consider the relative lifetime usability of the EV batteries compared with the hydrogen combustion engine. When these factors are taken into account, hydrogen for passenger cars becomes significantly more "clever".
Short term yes, EVs are better. However we're gonna have issues longer term trying to dispose of them and EV car batteries don't last that long. People who bought early model teslas in 2013-2014 ERA the car is basically totaled because the battery pack cost $20K to change. That's if it makes it 10 years. EV cars aren't as environmentally friendly as people think.
Excellent. Now to produce electricity, you can talk about 40 % (to be generous) efficiency of power plants. Then there are losses when charging the batteries, which tends to be about 90 %. So, in effect, you put 36 % efficiency to the car, than it utilizes only those 80 % to transfer the energy into motion. And we are getting roughly something around 30 % efficiency. Considering that you need to carry around several hundred kilograms of batteries and that running AC or heating up the cabin costs you lots of energy as well, then I guess EV doesn't sound great all of the sudden.
@@becausebuzzbomb6133 And how do you think we will make the electricity to make all that hydrogen? It has those exact same losses, but then an additional terrible 25% ish well to wheel conversion as opposed to the 70%ish that an EV can pull. It means that on a per km basis, an EV is always going to be about 2.5 times as cheap to operate as a hydrogen vehicle. Probably more since maintenance of a hydrogen distribution network also incurs costs that EVs simply don't have. Simple economics dictates that hydrogen cars are dead on arrival. There are certainly use cases for hydrogen in seasonal storage, long distance trucking and aircraft fuel, but personal vehicles just won't work out.
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 ruclips.net/video/vJjKwSF9gT8/видео.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 ruclips.net/video/Zklo4Z1SqkE/видео.html. If a physicist and an engineer both say it's not a good idea then seriously Toyota is dead.
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 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 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?
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.
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
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?
@@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
I still prefer charging at the comfort of my own home on a daily basis. Im pretty sure its gonna work with Toyota question is how abundant the Hydrogen filling stations are?
@@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
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.
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
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.
What abt the problem of it exploding? fuel cells tend to be kinda safe with a 689bar avg= steam/but they still explode I would rank EVs to be the most dangerous, solar with electric, hybrid-plug in, natural gas, then propane, then e85, then hydrogen ice, then petrol, then hybrids-non plug in, then hydrogen fuel cell
Comparison of efficiency from production to asphalt: Electric: 70 % H2: 15 - max 20 %! With this, I think everything is said about this video. One more note on the range of EV's. Once a year to plan one or two 20-minute stops is not particularly demanding and so you can go wherever you want with an EV.
The electricity that is used to charge your EV was most likely produced by a coal fired power plant. Not to mention the destruction of the planet from the mining to produce the batteries. Not so carbon friendly is it?
@@jeffrey9195 I charged my car today during work with 100% solar power. Our parking lots are covered with PV. PV electricity has only 40 - 80g CO2 / kWh. I think that's pretty smart and promising for the future. If I had to charge my EV with coal power, I wouldn't have one.
@@jeffrey9195 and where do you think the H2 comes from? It is either from the same coal fired power plant or from natural gas but the overall efficiency is much lower. Even fuel cells are much less effective than EV´s , H2 combustion engines are even worse. Carry on, attack the windmill Don Quichote....
@Jeffrey it actually is, not as much as renewable or natural gas but the long term carbon footprint of EVs is in fact lower than a comparable ICE car, even if the electricity comes from coal. The time it takes to become carbon negative is a few more years but over the lifetime of the car your net carbon footprint is lower with EVs regardless of energy source.
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.
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.......
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.
@@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.
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.
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%.
@@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?
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.
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.
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.
@@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!
@@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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
@Hitesh Insane nonsense, modern mass produced engines sound terrible all those benefits are Gone. No one is really buying nice sounding New engines anymore unless you're super rich. You live in lala land dreaming about a time that does not exist.
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
I did a project recently in school involving hydrogen and the cost is very high. It would be equivalent to $17/gal. Just remember this is years away from being affordable for your average consumer. Before hydrogen goes global, more people need to be trained and taught to work with it. That is one of the main problems when it comes to using hydrogen in the states. We don’t have enough people in the working class that can actually do things involving hydrogen.
@@chillmusic5629 the plan according to my professor is to use nuclear energy and electrolysis to produce hydrogen, which then makes it more efficient. The DoE is actively funding this research right now. It is still very new and is very far away from mass usage. This is why saying a hydrogen car will destroy the EV industry is a very far reach. Look how long it took for EVs to gain somewhat of a foothold around the country. There’s far too many people with knowledge and not enough training in the workforce for green proposals to make a huge impact very quickly. We should all be very vigilant on how they approach the introduction of hydrogen into our societies. EVs are a good example of how green ideas are proposed as the next big solution and then they gatekeep it to the rich. Accessibility over profitability at all costs.
"years away from being affordable" taking into account inflation and the increasing rarefaction of ressources, that pretty much means "it will never be affordable"
@@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.
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.
The major percent of H2 is made by heating fossil fuel to a temp high enough to cause the fossil fuel molecules to disassemble, thus freeing the H2. That's not cheap and uses a lot of fossil fuel for heating and for disassembling. @brianjones7660 The bottles need to be highly pressurized to hold more H2. As the smallest atom in the universe, it seeps out through many materials, so it is hard to contain.
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.
I drive a Mirai, beautiful car, but there aren’t enough places to get fuel, a lot of times they are off-line. They need to get the supply situation figured out first.
You could get an electrolyzer and make your own hydrogen at home. The problem is, it won't save money. It costs about the same per mile to electrolyze hydrogen for the fuel cell car as it does to fuel a similar gasoline hybrid. To fuel a hydrogen combustion car would cost twice as much. Charging a battery electric car at home costs less than 1/2 as much as any of the hydrogen solutions, and is much safer. You just won't save money with hydrogen, unless you have enough solar to cover the kWh necessary to make the necessary amount of hydrogen.
With trucking fleets starting to buy some hydrogen fuel cell trucks, we will probably see many more hydrogen stations popping up. At least I hope so. I would love to get a Mirai, but right now that would mean nearly a 3-hour drive to the nearest hydrogen station.
Presumably it is some sort of company car. That would mean that your employer picks up the bill, around double the running cost of petrol. If I had to pay that I wouldn't care less how beautiful the car was; I would be looking to get a proper EV as soon as possible. There are plenty of beautiful EVs and their very low running costs make them even more attractive.
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.
Getting hydrogen at scale needed is no small feat because of the tolerances to contain hydrogen itself are VERY tight, to store it without leak (which could be catastrophic) is difficult, but manufacturing and technology can overcome!
* No matter how thick the container is, it is still susceptible for leakages, hence dangerous. * World has to move away from the Combustion engines not just for emissions, but also for the amount of heat they produce. Average temperature is on the rise every year. #GlobalWarming Electric is they best solution for now.
technologically it is possible, but is it economical? So far the energy storage capacity of hydrogen is just lower than batteries (per volume), and batteries can and will evolve too. Also the infrastructure to carry electricity around is already there. It might need upgrades, but that's all stuff we already can build well. Infrastructure to distribute or make hydrogen still would need to be mass produced. So as it stands, batteries just win. I don't understand why Totyota clings so hard to hydrogen and doesn't event ry to go electric. Such a shame since they were pioneering the hybrid game.
@@nicolasmartin.exchanger Toyota has lost soooo many Prius owners who wanted to upgrade to an EV and were surprised that Toyota doesn’t offer this, so they had to go to Tesla, Chevy, Hyundai, …, etc.
Ever seen an BEV vehicle fire ? Due to huge amounts of poisonous fumes the firemen have to wear full respiratory gear, and the fire keeps re-lighting itself for days after. Hydrogen from a damaged tank will rapidly dissipate ( Hydrogen is much lighter than air ).
@@chrissmith2114 The ev's combusting weeks after the flood. This youtuber doesn't understand a lot of things. The image towards the beginning says, " Richard Sachek, says..." not "Toyota CEO!!" AND IT'S DATED 12-31-22. All click bait! Pay him no mind. We can't mine enough lithium, aren't prepared to dispose or recycle it. The Arabs are producing oil for decades to come. What do those rich buggers know? Well they're heavily invested in ev tech. They won't lose either way. What would lithium shortages be like if Toyota was on the ev train. Toyota genuinely cares about green and eco. Hydrogen might be better in targeted applications. Diverse applications. Diverse answers. Toyota said their diversity of research and tech will win the day. Hydrogen another arrow in the quiver. it's the full quiver, NOW WITH HYDROGEN!! Not any one technology. Toyota and the Arabs.
@@joelpierce3940 Yeah, that is why I am waiting to see battery powered main battle tanks and military aircraft, I know they are working on hydrogen powered engines for aircraft, but the power and range will be a lot shorter. Problem with battery powered aircraft is that the take-off weight ( and hence the range ) is a lot more than the landing weight, and I have never yet seen a battery that gets lighter weight as it discharges, so the max take-off weight of electric aircraft will be determined by the highest weight the aircraft can land at... Same for hydrogen really as the actual weight of hydrogen is a small part of the system weight compared to storage cylinders etc.
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.
@@ManuelGarcia-ww7gj Hydrogen is a more efficient fuel when compared to gasoline, and what "laws of thermodynamics" is this engine design "at odds with"? DO TELL
Things like this make me get excited, especially since I'm a private investor in a company that has created a Hydrogen ReFueling Station that can fit in your gargage and cost about 10K to manufacture. If you don't know, the biggest problem in the Hydrogen Fuel Celled Vehicle Industry is the limited capability to refuel them. NOT ANYMORE!!!
Oh yeah right they're going to let everyone produce massive amounts of liquid hydrogen in their garages. They don't let you buy large amounts of fertilizer or even own guns but sure, why not produce your own bombs. Okay. I'll believe it when I see it.
Actually the biggest problem is the cost to produce hydrogen is way too high. I've been watching hydrogen tech for decades because I expected it to take over but there has been no real advancement in the creation of hydrogen fuel.
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..
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 them the best of luck. We do not need to be divided in this effort to improve our climate, air quality and auto engine output. Toyota's concept that there is "not one approach" for all situations is good common sense and will keep them researching, developing and testing new models. And we all benefit from that effort.
CO2 is precisely 0.04 % of the earth's atmosphere. If it gets to .02, plant life starts to die off. How do you think that .04 percent of the atmosphere is responsible for a global climate change? And if you "improve air quality" any more you can forge about plant life on the planet. If anything, we need MORE CO2 to promote more plant growth. Over geological time, there have been higher temperatures and low CO2 levels and lower temperatures and higher CO2 levels due to volcanic activity and other natural occurrences so CO2 is NOT a drive of climate change nor is it correlated with higher temperatures.
The immense destruction to the planet a hydrogen fuel delivery system would require would just be a repeat of the gas age. It's not just about the emissions of a vehicle. Hydrogen is fuel that must be isolated, stored, transported, etc. Electricity is generated on-site by footprint smaller than a mailbox. We don't need to be divided, but we need to be smart and not waste resources and time for a third-rate "solution".
The efficiency of hydrogen fuel cells is about double that of hydrogen internal combustion engines (ICE). This means 1 KG of hydrogen can drive about 60 miles with a fuel cell car but only 30 miles with a ICE car. Which one would you pick?
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.
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.
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.
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
As they say, investment needs to go into multiple forays. No single technology is the right solution to cater to all kinds of requirements. Just like Diesel, Petrol, CNG co-existed maybe we'll see electric, hydrogen, alternate fuels to co-exist and depending on budget and usage requirements one would make a choice. Great to be seeing this shift in the industry ourselves instead of reading about this from history books :)
I don't see any situation where this will be better than a battery vehicle, except if you need to drive across the USA, and you were so unprepared you didn't plan to take an extra 6 hours. Like seriously, who drive 3000 miles at the drop of a hat without knowing they'd have to do it less than 24 hours later?
My Toyota Matrix has nearly 200K miles on the clock with no problems. I agree, the reduction in use of rare earth elements is a major advantage. EVs are attractive, but the manufacturing process has a huge carbon footprint. I'm just wondering if my little Matrix will last me until this awesome sounding Corolla H2 is on the market. And there is the issue of filling stations here in the US - I need to check on that.
@@naphion Your link is dubious at best, and does not address the availability of rare-earth metals nor the extraction methods used to get them. This engine by Toyota beats battery EVs on all counts.
@@sleepteam If you're going to claim my source is dubious, provide your own. Want another source? Google the patents in my name. My career included the invention of multiple technologies for fuel cell electric vehicles as well as other sustainable technologies. I might know what I'm talking about :) There's a lot of disinformation in my opinion against electric vehicles, I wonder why ...
@@naphion My guy, if you have patents in the EV industry, your opinion is even less valuable. You have too much stake on a specific horse in this race.
Not a single mention of the overall energy efficiency - this is the most important factor in how feasible this car will be for the future. A big reason why also synthetic fuels for cars are not a good idea is because of how much lower the enrgy efficiency of that whole process is compared to electric cars. We would need to produce about 3x as much energy to move all vehicles by the same amount. And one important bottleneck there is the combustion engine itself, which has peaked at less than 40% efficiency in the energy conversion. Is this hydrogen combustion engine any better? If not, then all this might ever be is an alternative for luxury cars, as it's just way better than synthetic fuel.
Vehicle hydrogen storage is the issue. Quick refilling generates a lot of pressure vessel heating potentially causing pressure tank degradation over time. Totally preventing plumbing leaks is also a challenge.
I'm hoping this is a different kind of Hydrogen fuel that we're not aware of, not being disclosed just yet. But if that's not the case, we have HVAC systems that can be used for added aid in conditioning the fuel. There are ways....
The biggest concern is refueling (well one of the biggest)... it's sort of sugar coated here. There have been stories from the few who have experienced refueling a hydrogen car and the instant freezing of the fueling connector.
@@BrokePencil They might be able to attach condensers or something to the exhaust manafold to make sure it's liquid when it exits, not vapour. Similar to what petrol cars do with catalytic converters. This runs the risk of it freezing in cold climates, but I'm sure there's a method they can work out to solve that.
I have never seen this happen filling up my Toyota Mirai, not even once. Maybe that was like 10 years ago. Do you really think they wouldn't upgrade the pumps in that time to prevent this?
Would really love to see this technology mature. Once infrastructure for refueling established and storage safety is proven reliable only then will this be a game changer.
Everyone still says hydrogen storage needs to be fixed, but we fixed it years ago using metal hydride. You can store hydrogen gas in solid metal, we used this technology in nuclear bombs and that's why it couldn't be used publicly. The government put a ban on using metal hydride because it was used for nuclear bombs, things are changing now and im all for using metal hydrides for cars.
meh. infrastructure is already there for battery powered. Anything SUV or smaller, just use a battery. You can recharge at home. For H2, you would have to build a nationwide infrastructure for it. Building physical stuff across the country is extremely expensive. That's why private industry moved to airplanes instead of going with trains for high speed. H2 is better for large vehicles like trucks that can't be powered off batteries. Just realize....there are no fossil fuels involved in this thing. It's zero emission just like an electric car. Also don't forget, right now, the only H2 stations are in California.
Scientist studied weather patterns back in the mid 1990's, since records were first kept and what they determined is going on is, due to the increase and decrease in solar flare activity that occurs over a 30 to 40 year cycle. That can increase the temperatures on the earth when the flares are on the increase and decrease them when they are decreasing. That makes sense. Liberals have been lying about global warming-climate change for years! Global warming on Mars, ice caps melting (And there are no humans there to cause it by using fossil fuels either.) Global warming being caused by humans using fossil fuel is a LIE!!!! Mars is warming "Some people think that our planet is suffering from a fever. Now scientists are telling us that Mars is experiencing its own planetary warming: Martian warming. It seems scientists have noticed recently that quite a few planets in our solar system seem to be heating up a bit, including Pluto. NASA says the Martian South Pole’s “ice cap” has been shrinking for three summers in a row. Maybe Mars got its fever from earth. If so, I guess Jupiter’s caught the same cold, because it’s warming up too, like Pluto." (Fred Thompson). skepticalscience.com/global-warming-on-mars.htm
Made it fast as possible and export it to over the world and i will get to support your ideas. And the time of Hydrogen car's presents and i will get to buy it.
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.
If it ends up the end of anything, it might be the end of Toyota being on top. In the era of mirai, hydrogen stations were installed, most of them are closed again by now. Compare that to the growth of EV charging locations, growth of electric vans and trucks.
Its fine, the more proof we got the more trusted the technology would be. And the more substantial the impact on today’s current environment, the more money will be put on placing those requirements needed
That's because of marketing and public ignorance, an EV isn't as sustainable as people think, the construction process has a very high carbon impact due to the mining process of rare materiels needed for it's construction. Not to mention until power grid infrastructure is sustainable, EVs will be running on electricity mostly produced from carbon fuel sources
Imagine what if after they perfected the technology and then upgraded existing petroleum fuel stations to h2 fuel stations in a nation wide campaign. That will turn the table against evs
If there's anything Toyota has been doing over the last decade(s), it's marketing. If they hadn't their hybrids (self charging as they say) would have been in a much worse place as well already. And as far as the origin: carbon fuel is carbon fuel, but electricity you can get green, know people that ran their car almost exclusively with energy of their own solar panels. And compared to hydrogen (which is more than 98% fossil fuel based currently), that's even a lot worse than EV if you look at the current state of things
The perfect H2 combustion engine is still limited by physics. Don't know the exact numbers but getting 50% efficiency with an ICE is a huge achievement. H2 and EVs are already competing and in every sector from cars to trucks, battery electric is currently coming up on top (yeah that amazed me too). Besides, don't know why people are so fascinated with putting the stuff that exploded in Fukushima in their car.
Kudos? For what? They're selling us another complicated, spare parts/ service-intensive technology that will allow them to continue to gouge the motorist mercilessly.
@@komradepistoff6584 You hate Toyota, so of course you will try spreading lies. Fact is, Toyota is the worlds biggest car company and they sell more cars than everyone else. They wouldn't be in that position if they were too expensive. The maintenance bills on Toyotas is very low, much less than the rest of the cars because of how reliable Toyota's are. Stop hating Toyota... you probably work for Honda...lol
Options are really good. That's why I don't get why they are trying to ban ICE cars. If you're justification is that people really don't want to use them anyway, then you don't need to ban them, since you claim people don't want to use them. Climate agenda is just an ego trip for bureaucrats.
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...
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 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.
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.
I am very skeptical of the market viability of a hydrogen combustion engine. Even if the technology is better and more efficient, the success of HCE car will depend on the infrastructure around hydrogen production/storage/delivery to traditional gas stations. Leave aside the safety aspect of it, can it be build up fast enough to compete against EVs? Don’t forget battery tech is also advancing (sodium ion battery replacing lithium, faster charging, etc). I doubt it can catch up to the head start already made by EVs.
10 years ago there was hardly any infrastructure for EVs... If it's deemed a better alternative by the masses, the infrastructure can be built. Sodium ion won't replace lithium for another decade +, even when it does,.it.doesnt solve the slower charging times or electric costs, that's needs addressed for the masses to buy in. As the price of H drops and infrastructure is created, i would be more inclined to buy an H2 vehicle.
I agree! Cause when we look at the development och EV's and this new H2 cars, it pretty obvious the the EV are heading in a cheaper and more efficient direction, but all that took it's time, so for this H2 car to get to the same point would take a long time... by that time most of the EV Costs will be even better and the cars Range efficiency will be much better. The sodium battery's are already in use in same places so it's not that long.
Hydrogen leaks very easily and is extremely difficult to transport in lines and store. And what's the most ridiculous thing is that it emits water vapor which is a more potent greenhouse gas than Co2 and definitely will be a big safety concern in cold climates.
@@abhinavchauhan1006 Production pollution is massive, 11 years of driving for an ICE vehicle is equal to battery production for 1 EV.. Tell me how thats green? Lets not forget they are using diesel generators to recharge EV's.. Tell me how thats green.. Go on, try it....
There is a business case for hydrogen powered vehicles especially when off grid or in remote locations or long storage/periods of disuse. The problem is that the round trip efficiency of producing hydrogen using renewable electricity and hydrolysis then a fuel cell/electric motor or ICE is significantly lower than just using the renewable electricity in a BEV. BEV’s make more sense for most use cases especially as new battery technologies come to market and scale.
Right, because they will have a hydrogen fuel station in the outback. And leaving a hydrogen tank for months will for sure empty it due to it boiling off.
But ev’s just don’t function in cold weather. This is the greater use case for hydrogen powered vehicles, which is a huge market worldwide. What manufacturer markets to a minority group “off grid or in remote locations”?
@@goofsaddggkle7351 Ask Norwegians, I believe they have their fair share of cold weather, yet >85% of new vehicles sold are BEVs. And what makes you think that hydrogen could be a solution for off the grid and remote locations? It's not like petrol, which you can just store in a jerrycan. The transport and storage cost of hydrogen are insane.
it's cool, but honestly one of the appeals to me with electric cars is the non-existent maintenance. there are no pulleys and belts to replace, no spark plugs or whatever, no oil to change, no radiator fluid to keep topped up, transmission fluid, etc. Just charge it and go. I like the idea of Hydrogen as a power source though, maybe a hydrogen powered charging station for EVs would be a good option for remote areas that lack big city EV charging infrastructure
Non-existent is far fetched. I would agree that the maintenance can be significantly lower. What exactly entails "maintenance?" Does tire wear count? The primary trade-off being that when there is maintenance, the average person probably won't be able to do it in their garage and they will be forced to go to the manufacturer. Tesla's 2021 impact report states the average lifespan of batteries is 200,000 miles. I'm not against electric vehicles. In fact, I'd like to own one as soon as I can no longer maintain my 2004 Dodge Ram 1500. I love the fact that I'm the only one who has done maintenance on it. It's almost a test of how good my troubleshooting and repair skills can be.
Hydrogen is a really interesting route. It will be great for cargo trucks, and it could be really useful for everyday vehicles too. Moving the entire transportation industry to electric is going to be really tough, there needs to be hundreds of thousands of nee transmission lines and much more generation to accommodate charging networks
@@surreal5335 'gas' is generally imported from the middle east etc. The electricity you need to charge your EV ill be produced locally, hence the need for infrastructure investment
An ICEngine matched to a plug-in hybrid drivetrain could in theory deliver more than twice the equivalent MPG possible with H fuel cell EV tech. Toyota has produced two ICEngines that run on hydrogen, but NOT a fuel sipping ICEngine to operate even more effectively in a plug-in hybrid drivetrain. The LA Times published an article this century titled "The 500 mpg Solution" regrading plug-in hybrid tech. I guess Toyota just doesn't want to do it alone.
It's laughable that ignorant politicians think the existing grids (which are extremely difficult to upgrade) can handle the extra load of charging all at the same time.
The problem is fuel storage. Same as batteries really. With fuel cells its not a problem but with Hydrogen combustion it's a big problem. I think you need a fuel tank something like 6 times the size as you would wirh gas. This could work for drag racing applications. We could all convert our SBCs to hydrogen etc.
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.
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.
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
You're a liar. No one is using hydrogen for anything after 40 years of lies.
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.
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
Brandon, what did you find out about nitrogen oxides? Is it a big problem?
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.
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 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....."
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.
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.
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.
I hope that this works out, just generating water vapor should be a LOT better than anything else we have right now! Go toyota!
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).
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...
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.
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.
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 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
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.
Toyota + Yamaha, match made in heaven
LFA is screaming in the background
4age 20v And 3sge beams 💪🏽
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.
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?
The race is on , in a decade or two, we will see the winner. Personally I have passion for internal combustion engine, but, it's not the way to the future, who needs oils, filters, exhaust pipes, spark plugs, and all that maintenance work ??
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?
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. ruclips.net/user/shortsQZ2oveLNZo4
@@hkiajtaqks5253 little do you know. Modern batteries hold up to 300000km easily.
The system efficiency (well to wheel) with H2 is about 20-25%. The system efficiency of an EV is over 80% to be conservative. H2 for passenger cars is (from technical stand point) not very clever. H2 can surely be a solution for transportation needs like big air planes, trucks and ships etc., but I‘m afraid it will not save the beloved internal combustion engin.
Your assessment is incomplete, you do not take in account the method of electricity production used to recharge the EV batteries at all. Neither do you take into account the environmental or energy costs of battery creation. You also forget to consider the relative lifetime usability of the EV batteries compared with the hydrogen combustion engine. When these factors are taken into account, hydrogen for passenger cars becomes significantly more "clever".
Short term yes, EVs are better. However we're gonna have issues longer term trying to dispose of them and EV car batteries don't last that long. People who bought early model teslas in 2013-2014 ERA the car is basically totaled because the battery pack cost $20K to change. That's if it makes it 10 years. EV cars aren't as environmentally friendly as people think.
I guess you know more than one of the largest most successful car companies in the world, my bet is on Toyota.
Excellent. Now to produce electricity, you can talk about 40 % (to be generous) efficiency of power plants. Then there are losses when charging the batteries, which tends to be about 90 %. So, in effect, you put 36 % efficiency to the car, than it utilizes only those 80 % to transfer the energy into motion. And we are getting roughly something around 30 % efficiency.
Considering that you need to carry around several hundred kilograms of batteries and that running AC or heating up the cabin costs you lots of energy as well, then I guess EV doesn't sound great all of the sudden.
@@becausebuzzbomb6133 And how do you think we will make the electricity to make all that hydrogen? It has those exact same losses, but then an additional terrible 25% ish well to wheel conversion as opposed to the 70%ish that an EV can pull. It means that on a per km basis, an EV is always going to be about 2.5 times as cheap to operate as a hydrogen vehicle. Probably more since maintenance of a hydrogen distribution network also incurs costs that EVs simply don't have.
Simple economics dictates that hydrogen cars are dead on arrival. There are certainly use cases for hydrogen in seasonal storage, long distance trucking and aircraft fuel, but personal vehicles just won't work out.
Sounds like an advertisement for Toyota
No this is real
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 ruclips.net/video/vJjKwSF9gT8/видео.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 ruclips.net/video/Zklo4Z1SqkE/видео.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 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........
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
I still prefer charging at the comfort of my own home on a daily basis. Im pretty sure its gonna work with Toyota question is how abundant the Hydrogen filling stations are?
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.
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.
@Logical Musicman 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 😂
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
What abt the problem of it exploding? fuel cells tend to be kinda safe with a 689bar avg= steam/but they still explode I would rank EVs to be the most dangerous, solar with electric, hybrid-plug in, natural gas, then propane, then e85, then hydrogen ice, then petrol, then hybrids-non plug in, then hydrogen fuel cell
Comparison of efficiency from production to asphalt:
Electric: 70 %
H2: 15 - max 20 %!
With this, I think everything is said about this video.
One more note on the range of EV's.
Once a year to plan one or two 20-minute stops is not particularly demanding and so you can go wherever you want with an EV.
The electricity that is used to charge your EV was most likely produced by a coal fired power plant. Not to mention the destruction of the planet from the mining to produce the batteries. Not so carbon friendly is it?
@@jeffrey9195 I charged my car today during work with 100% solar power. Our parking lots are covered with PV. PV electricity has only 40 - 80g CO2 / kWh. I think that's pretty smart and promising for the future.
If I had to charge my EV with coal power, I wouldn't have one.
@@jeffrey9195 and where do you think the H2 comes from? It is either from the same coal fired power plant or from natural gas but the overall efficiency is much lower. Even fuel cells are much less effective than EV´s , H2 combustion engines are even worse. Carry on, attack the windmill Don Quichote....
@Jeffrey it actually is, not as much as renewable or natural gas but the long term carbon footprint of EVs is in fact lower than a comparable ICE car, even if the electricity comes from coal. The time it takes to become carbon negative is a few more years but over the lifetime of the car your net carbon footprint is lower with EVs regardless of energy source.
@@lukasschmid1247 you'd still be carbon negative over the lifespan of your vehicle compared to ICE.
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.......
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.
Now that's a car I 🚗 will buy as soon as I can get one or 2!!!!!!!+yes
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.
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.
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 here for the 8 into 1 headers! This engine looks nice.
How will it perform in sub-0 weather?
That’s a qood question I wanna know if it’ll freeze
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.
@@RAVEZebrasus137 producing hydrogen requires power too, and it’s not as efficient as just straight up using the electricity.
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?
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.
it's still a bomb on wheels...
it may work in some applications but I'm sure it will be highly regulated!
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 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.
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.
@hitesh6245 "generations of conditioning won't change that easy". Well, those generations eventually get old and die.
@Hitesh Insane nonsense, modern mass produced engines sound terrible all those benefits are Gone. No one is really buying nice sounding New engines anymore unless you're super rich. You live in lala land dreaming about a time that does not exist.
One of the best parts in my opinion is the fact it can be mated with a manual trans!
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
"its not about being different its about being better>"
perfectly said tbh
I did a project recently in school involving hydrogen and the cost is very high. It would be equivalent to $17/gal. Just remember this is years away from being affordable for your average consumer. Before hydrogen goes global, more people need to be trained and taught to work with it. That is one of the main problems when it comes to using hydrogen in the states. We don’t have enough people in the working class that can actually do things involving hydrogen.
Top Comment
How many gallons do you need to go 300 to 400 miles?
@Chill Music well said!!!!
@@chillmusic5629 the plan according to my professor is to use nuclear energy and electrolysis to produce hydrogen, which then makes it more efficient. The DoE is actively funding this research right now. It is still very new and is very far away from mass usage. This is why saying a hydrogen car will destroy the EV industry is a very far reach. Look how long it took for EVs to gain somewhat of a foothold around the country. There’s far too many people with knowledge and not enough training in the workforce for green proposals to make a huge impact very quickly. We should all be very vigilant on how they approach the introduction of hydrogen into our societies. EVs are a good example of how green ideas are proposed as the next big solution and then they gatekeep it to the rich. Accessibility over profitability at all costs.
"years away from being affordable" taking into account inflation and the increasing rarefaction of ressources, that pretty much means "it will never be affordable"
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.
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>
The major percent of H2 is made by heating fossil fuel to a temp high enough to cause the fossil fuel molecules to disassemble, thus freeing the H2. That's not cheap and uses a lot of fossil fuel for heating and for disassembling.
@brianjones7660
The bottles need to be highly pressurized to hold more H2. As the smallest atom in the universe, it seeps out through many materials, so it is hard to contain.
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.
I drive a Mirai, beautiful car, but there aren’t enough places to get fuel, a lot of times they are off-line. They need to get the supply situation figured out first.
You could get an electrolyzer and make your own hydrogen at home. The problem is, it won't save money. It costs about the same per mile to electrolyze hydrogen for the fuel cell car as it does to fuel a similar gasoline hybrid. To fuel a hydrogen combustion car would cost twice as much. Charging a battery electric car at home costs less than 1/2 as much as any of the hydrogen solutions, and is much safer. You just won't save money with hydrogen, unless you have enough solar to cover the kWh necessary to make the necessary amount of hydrogen.
K0pkk0
I thought you could put water in it like their Ad showed a random lake
With trucking fleets starting to buy some hydrogen fuel cell trucks, we will probably see many more hydrogen stations popping up. At least I hope so. I would love to get a Mirai, but right now that would mean nearly a 3-hour drive to the nearest hydrogen station.
Presumably it is some sort of company car. That would mean that your employer picks up the bill, around double the running cost of petrol. If I had to pay that I wouldn't care less how beautiful the car was; I would be looking to get a proper EV as soon as possible. There are plenty of beautiful EVs and their very low running costs make them even more attractive.
I want to take a sec and appreciate the video. I can imagine the editing this one would have taken. Great great work!!
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.
Getting hydrogen at scale needed is no small feat because of the tolerances to contain hydrogen itself are VERY tight, to store it without leak (which could be catastrophic) is difficult, but manufacturing and technology can overcome!
* No matter how thick the container is, it is still susceptible for leakages, hence dangerous.
* World has to move away from the Combustion engines not just for emissions, but also for the amount of heat they produce. Average temperature is on the rise every year. #GlobalWarming
Electric is they best solution for now.
technologically it is possible, but is it economical? So far the energy storage capacity of hydrogen is just lower than batteries (per volume), and batteries can and will evolve too. Also the infrastructure to carry electricity around is already there. It might need upgrades, but that's all stuff we already can build well. Infrastructure to distribute or make hydrogen still would need to be mass produced. So as it stands, batteries just win. I don't understand why Totyota clings so hard to hydrogen and doesn't event ry to go electric. Such a shame since they were pioneering the hybrid game.
@@nicolasmartin.exchanger Toyota has lost soooo many Prius owners who wanted to upgrade to an EV and were surprised that Toyota doesn’t offer this, so they had to go to Tesla, Chevy, Hyundai, …, etc.
@@taazaspices7500 re: " Average temperature is on the ri"
Not correct.
@@uploadJ yes it is,
sitting in AC you may not realise,
see the data everywhere, IC engines speed up atmospheric heating.
The crash test video would be a blast! No pun intended
Ever seen an BEV vehicle fire ? Due to huge amounts of poisonous fumes the firemen have to wear full respiratory gear, and the fire keeps re-lighting itself for days after. Hydrogen from a damaged tank will rapidly dissipate ( Hydrogen is much lighter than air ).
Gasoline has way more BTU’s than Hydrogen.
@@chrissmith2114 The ev's combusting weeks after the flood. This youtuber doesn't understand a lot of things. The image towards the beginning says, " Richard Sachek, says..." not "Toyota CEO!!" AND IT'S DATED 12-31-22. All click bait! Pay him no mind. We can't mine enough lithium, aren't prepared to dispose or recycle it. The Arabs are producing oil for decades to come. What do those rich buggers know? Well they're heavily invested in ev tech. They won't lose either way. What would lithium shortages be like if Toyota was on the ev train. Toyota genuinely cares about green and eco. Hydrogen might be better in targeted applications. Diverse applications. Diverse answers. Toyota said their diversity of research and tech will win the day. Hydrogen another arrow in the quiver. it's the full quiver, NOW WITH HYDROGEN!! Not any one technology. Toyota and the Arabs.
@@joelpierce3940 Yeah, that is why I am waiting to see battery powered main battle tanks and military aircraft, I know they are working on hydrogen powered engines for aircraft, but the power and range will be a lot shorter. Problem with battery powered aircraft is that the take-off weight ( and hence the range ) is a lot more than the landing weight, and I have never yet seen a battery that gets lighter weight as it discharges, so the max take-off weight of electric aircraft will be determined by the highest weight the aircraft can land at... Same for hydrogen really as the actual weight of hydrogen is a small part of the system weight compared to storage cylinders etc.
@@chrissmith2114or rapidly explode like a hydrogen bomb
Not a new tech, just many have not been successful in making a safe hyrdro vehicle. I am glad that they're on it!! Hope it's not insanely priced.
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.
It sounds fantastic and it's totally at odds with the laws of thermodynamics from the beginning. How can it be a serious proposition?
You underestimate the power of fission.
It is a serious proposition because you have no idea what you're talking about.
@@smarterthanyou9090 So YOU say.
@@smarterthanyou9090 well you obviously don't
@@ManuelGarcia-ww7gj Hydrogen is a more efficient fuel when compared to gasoline, and what "laws of thermodynamics" is this engine design "at odds with"? DO TELL
Things like this make me get excited, especially since I'm a private investor in a company that has created a Hydrogen ReFueling Station that can fit in your gargage and cost about 10K to manufacture. If you don't know, the biggest problem in the Hydrogen Fuel Celled Vehicle Industry is the limited capability to refuel them. NOT ANYMORE!!!
Oh yeah right they're going to let everyone produce massive amounts of liquid hydrogen in their garages. They don't let you buy large amounts of fertilizer or even own guns but sure, why not produce your own bombs. Okay. I'll believe it when I see it.
Actually the biggest problem is the cost to produce hydrogen is way too high. I've been watching hydrogen tech for decades because I expected it to take over but there has been no real advancement in the creation of hydrogen fuel.
What Company is this?? looks like they were thinking ahead
@Curtis Wolfe HNOI my friend.
@Cosmic1 They have solved that as well in a compact product.
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.
Where does the H2 come from and how much energy is required to provide it?
I wish them the best of luck. We do not need to be divided in this effort to improve our climate, air quality and auto engine output. Toyota's concept that there is "not one approach" for all situations is good common sense and will keep them researching, developing and testing new models. And we all benefit from that effort.
CO2 is precisely 0.04 % of the earth's atmosphere. If it gets to .02, plant life starts to die off.
How do you think that .04 percent of the atmosphere is responsible for a global climate change? And if you "improve air quality" any more you can forge about plant life on the planet.
If anything, we need MORE CO2 to promote more plant growth.
Over geological time, there have been higher temperatures and low CO2 levels and lower temperatures and higher CO2 levels due to volcanic activity and other natural occurrences so CO2 is NOT a drive of climate change nor is it correlated with higher temperatures.
The immense destruction to the planet a hydrogen fuel delivery system would require would just be a repeat of the gas age. It's not just about the emissions of a vehicle. Hydrogen is fuel that must be isolated, stored, transported, etc. Electricity is generated on-site by footprint smaller than a mailbox. We don't need to be divided, but we need to be smart and not waste resources and time for a third-rate "solution".
Assuming we even have a climate problem to begin with
Assuming we even have a climate problem to begin with
Assuming we even have a climate problem to begin with
I am all for whatever works and gives us more choices. So that we can choose whichever is best of us.
The efficiency of hydrogen fuel cells is about double that of hydrogen internal combustion engines (ICE). This means 1 KG of hydrogen can drive about 60 miles with a fuel cell car but only 30 miles with a ICE car. Which one would you pick?
@@medatrium6714 I'd pick the one that can carry the most load or tow the most weight.
Excuse me, the left will decide what is best for you. You just do as you are told.
@@mrrey8937 Go buy a Tesla Semi. Seems like the right vehicle for you :-)
@@mrleenudler yeah, it does meet all the requirements. Sad state of affair this EV market is in.
I never wanted a pure electric vehicle myself! I fell for the hydrogen story long ago! I hope Toyota is successful with this thing!
I drive pure electric. Unless you are travelling more than 500 highway miles a day, it's perfectly viable.
We shall see.
@@AdodgerWho I do drive more than 500 miles per day when I'm traveling, so no EV for me.
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.
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
As they say, investment needs to go into multiple forays. No single technology is the right solution to cater to all kinds of requirements. Just like Diesel, Petrol, CNG co-existed maybe we'll see electric, hydrogen, alternate fuels to co-exist and depending on budget and usage requirements one would make a choice. Great to be seeing this shift in the industry ourselves instead of reading about this from history books :)
Rightly said Akhil, why do we become so obsessed with one technology?
And a govt will come and mandate ONE source and put all eggs in one basket. Such short sightedness will always restrict advancements
I don't see any situation where this will be better than a battery vehicle, except if you need to drive across the USA, and you were so unprepared you didn't plan to take an extra 6 hours.
Like seriously, who drive 3000 miles at the drop of a hat without knowing they'd have to do it less than 24 hours later?
Sounds good, sounds great, also sounds like the future for automobiles. Lets hear for Toyota!!
Time to buy more Tesla stock i guess...
My Toyota Matrix has nearly 200K miles on the clock with no problems. I agree, the reduction in use of rare earth elements is a major advantage. EVs are attractive, but the manufacturing process has a huge carbon footprint. I'm just wondering if my little Matrix will last me until this awesome sounding Corolla H2 is on the market. And there is the issue of filling stations here in the US - I need to check on that.
500,000miles if you take care of her or him :)
You're wrong. www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths
@@naphion Your link is dubious at best, and does not address the availability of rare-earth metals nor the extraction methods used to get them. This engine by Toyota beats battery EVs on all counts.
@@sleepteam If you're going to claim my source is dubious, provide your own. Want another source? Google the patents in my name. My career included the invention of multiple technologies for fuel cell electric vehicles as well as other sustainable technologies. I might know what I'm talking about :) There's a lot of disinformation in my opinion against electric vehicles, I wonder why ...
@@naphion
My guy, if you have patents in the EV industry, your opinion is even less valuable. You have too much stake on a specific horse in this race.
Not a single mention of the overall energy efficiency - this is the most important factor in how feasible this car will be for the future.
A big reason why also synthetic fuels for cars are not a good idea is because of how much lower the enrgy efficiency of that whole process is compared to electric cars. We would need to produce about 3x as much energy to move all vehicles by the same amount.
And one important bottleneck there is the combustion engine itself, which has peaked at less than 40% efficiency in the energy conversion. Is this hydrogen combustion engine any better? If not, then all this might ever be is an alternative for luxury cars, as it's just way better than synthetic fuel.
nuclear.......
Hyundai has been selling hydrogen tuczons in europe for over 6 years
Vehicle hydrogen storage is the issue. Quick refilling generates a lot of pressure vessel heating potentially causing pressure tank degradation over time. Totally preventing plumbing leaks is also a challenge.
I'm hoping this is a different kind of Hydrogen fuel that we're not aware of, not being disclosed just yet. But if that's not the case, we have HVAC systems that can be used for added aid in conditioning the fuel. There are ways....
Toyota printed the expiration date for the hydrogen tank on the filler door.
That's where technology comes in.
You have no clue what you're talking about.
It just feels like we're trying to solve impossible problems.
The biggest concern is refueling (well one of the biggest)... it's sort of sugar coated here. There have been stories from the few who have experienced refueling a hydrogen car and the instant freezing of the fueling connector.
@@BrokePencil That isn't a real concern as water vapor readily condenses to water.
It helps if it's kept dry.
Also, H2 needs to be pressurized to 700 bar for fueling. It takes about 36 minutes for one pump to get ready for the next car.
@@BrokePencil They might be able to attach condensers or something to the exhaust manafold to make sure it's liquid when it exits, not vapour. Similar to what petrol cars do with catalytic converters. This runs the risk of it freezing in cold climates, but I'm sure there's a method they can work out to solve that.
I have never seen this happen filling up my Toyota Mirai, not even once. Maybe that was like 10 years ago. Do you really think they wouldn't upgrade the pumps in that time to prevent this?
Would really love to see this technology mature. Once infrastructure for refueling established and storage safety is proven reliable only then will this be a game changer.
@Trevor Braun thanks for figuring this out for us Mr RUclips scientist, please accept this humble novel prize for your contributions to society.
Everyone still says hydrogen storage needs to be fixed, but we fixed it years ago using metal hydride. You can store hydrogen gas in solid metal, we used this technology in nuclear bombs and that's why it couldn't be used publicly. The government put a ban on using metal hydride because it was used for nuclear bombs, things are changing now and im all for using metal hydrides for cars.
meh. infrastructure is already there for battery powered. Anything SUV or smaller, just use a battery. You can recharge at home.
For H2, you would have to build a nationwide infrastructure for it. Building physical stuff across the country is extremely expensive. That's why private industry moved to airplanes instead of going with trains for high speed.
H2 is better for large vehicles like trucks that can't be powered off batteries.
Just realize....there are no fossil fuels involved in this thing. It's zero emission just like an electric car.
Also don't forget, right now, the only H2 stations are in California.
Scientist studied weather patterns back in the mid 1990's, since records were first kept and what they determined is going on is, due to the increase and decrease in solar flare activity that occurs over a 30 to 40 year cycle. That can increase the temperatures on the earth when the flares are on the increase and decrease them when they are decreasing. That makes sense.
Liberals have been lying about global warming-climate change for years!
Global warming on Mars, ice caps melting
(And there are no humans there to cause it by using fossil fuels either.) Global warming being caused by humans using fossil fuel is a LIE!!!!
Mars is warming
"Some people think that our planet is suffering from a fever. Now scientists are telling us that Mars is experiencing its own planetary warming: Martian warming. It seems scientists have noticed recently that quite a few planets in our solar system seem to be heating up a bit, including Pluto.
NASA says the Martian South Pole’s “ice cap” has been shrinking for three summers in a row. Maybe Mars got its fever from earth. If so, I guess Jupiter’s caught the same cold, because it’s warming up too, like Pluto." (Fred Thompson).
skepticalscience.com/global-warming-on-mars.htm
They can make water fuel cells but that tech gets hushed pretty quick when people figure it out.
Made it fast as possible and export it to over the world and i will get to support your ideas. And the time of Hydrogen car's presents and i will get to buy it.
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.
It is a very good news for the other car manufacturers that Toyota persists in its hydrogen obstinacy.
Japanese are willing
They are betting...go big or go home, at this stage now. Not like they have a choice anyway.
If it ends up the end of anything, it might be the end of Toyota being on top. In the era of mirai, hydrogen stations were installed, most of them are closed again by now. Compare that to the growth of EV charging locations, growth of electric vans and trucks.
Its fine, the more proof we got the more trusted the technology would be. And the more substantial the impact on today’s current environment, the more money will be put on placing those requirements needed
That's because of marketing and public ignorance, an EV isn't as sustainable as people think, the construction process has a very high carbon impact due to the mining process of rare materiels needed for it's construction. Not to mention until power grid infrastructure is sustainable, EVs will be running on electricity mostly produced from carbon fuel sources
Imagine what if after they perfected the technology and then upgraded existing petroleum fuel stations to h2 fuel stations in a nation wide campaign. That will turn the table against evs
If there's anything Toyota has been doing over the last decade(s), it's marketing. If they hadn't their hybrids (self charging as they say) would have been in a much worse place as well already. And as far as the origin: carbon fuel is carbon fuel, but electricity you can get green, know people that ran their car almost exclusively with energy of their own solar panels.
And compared to hydrogen (which is more than 98% fossil fuel based currently), that's even a lot worse than EV if you look at the current state of things
The perfect H2 combustion engine is still limited by physics. Don't know the exact numbers but getting 50% efficiency with an ICE is a huge achievement.
H2 and EVs are already competing and in every sector from cars to trucks, battery electric is currently coming up on top (yeah that amazed me too).
Besides, don't know why people are so fascinated with putting the stuff that exploded in Fukushima in their car.
When I heard about being better I can't help hearing peel&key saying
Dint be sorry be better lol 😆
Kudos to team Toyota!
Kudos? For what? They're selling us another complicated, spare parts/ service-intensive technology that will allow them to continue to gouge the motorist mercilessly.
I agree, Toyota has the money and skillz required to make this a success. It looks like a much better alternative than EV.
@@COSMACELF1802 Yeh? Until you see the maintenance bills $$$$$
@@komradepistoff6584 You hate Toyota, so of course you will try spreading lies. Fact is, Toyota is the worlds biggest car company and they sell more cars than everyone else. They wouldn't be in that position if they were too expensive. The maintenance bills on Toyotas is very low, much less than the rest of the cars because of how reliable Toyota's are. Stop hating Toyota... you probably work for Honda...lol
@@COSMACELF1802 You either don't own a Toyota, or you work for them. Either way, you've provide NO evidence to support your position.
Having options is really good. EVs are not exactly problem free. This actually seems more promising to if given proper support.
Options are really good. That's why I don't get why they are trying to ban ICE cars. If you're justification is that people really don't want to use them anyway, then you don't need to ban them, since you claim people don't want to use them.
Climate agenda is just an ego trip for bureaucrats.
H2 in vehicles is a waste of time, money and resources
Sven list 0 reasons because hes a real cumswapper
Options would be nice if it was Viable and somewhat affordable. Sadly this is just vaporware.
One word: Hindenburg.
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.
How much energy and co2 emissions for producing hydrogen is conveniently left out.
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.
I am very skeptical of the market viability of a hydrogen combustion engine. Even if the technology is better and more efficient, the success of HCE car will depend on the infrastructure around hydrogen production/storage/delivery to traditional gas stations. Leave aside the safety aspect of it, can it be build up fast enough to compete against EVs? Don’t forget battery tech is also advancing (sodium ion battery replacing lithium, faster charging, etc). I doubt it can catch up to the head start already made by EVs.
10 years ago there was hardly any infrastructure for EVs... If it's deemed a better alternative by the masses, the infrastructure can be built. Sodium ion won't replace lithium for another decade +, even when it does,.it.doesnt solve the slower charging times or electric costs, that's needs addressed for the masses to buy in. As the price of H drops and infrastructure is created, i would be more inclined to buy an H2 vehicle.
@@Kevin-4i think you don't know that batteries have become far cheaper and very fast at charging compared to 10 years ago
I agree! Cause when we look at the development och EV's and this new H2 cars, it pretty obvious the the EV are heading in a cheaper and more efficient direction, but all that took it's time, so for this H2 car to get to the same point would take a long time... by that time most of the EV Costs will be even better and the cars Range efficiency will be much better.
The sodium battery's are already in use in same places so it's not that long.
Hydrogen leaks very easily and is extremely difficult to transport in lines and store. And what's the most ridiculous thing is that it emits water vapor which is a more potent greenhouse gas than Co2 and definitely will be a big safety concern in cold climates.
@@abhinavchauhan1006 Production pollution is massive, 11 years of driving for an ICE vehicle is equal to battery production for 1 EV.. Tell me how thats green? Lets not forget they are using diesel generators to recharge EV's.. Tell me how thats green.. Go on, try it....
Being a gear head (Mechanical Engineer).. I love the fact you are making such vdos.. Appreciate it
jokes on you, automobile companies are hiring more EE students than ME, at least what I saw in my Institute 😂
I like this, It appears very sustainable and realistic.
There is a business case for hydrogen powered vehicles especially when off grid or in remote locations or long storage/periods of disuse. The problem is that the round trip efficiency of producing hydrogen using renewable electricity and hydrolysis then a fuel cell/electric motor or ICE is significantly lower than just using the renewable electricity in a BEV. BEV’s make more sense for most use cases especially as new battery technologies come to market and scale.
Right, because they will have a hydrogen fuel station in the outback. And leaving a hydrogen tank for months will for sure empty it due to it boiling off.
But ev’s just don’t function in cold weather. This is the greater use case for hydrogen powered vehicles, which is a huge market worldwide. What manufacturer markets to a minority group “off grid or in remote locations”?
@@goofsaddggkle7351 Ask Norwegians, I believe they have their fair share of cold weather, yet >85% of new vehicles sold are BEVs. And what makes you think that hydrogen could be a solution for off the grid and remote locations? It's not like petrol, which you can just store in a jerrycan. The transport and storage cost of hydrogen are insane.
it's cool, but honestly one of the appeals to me with electric cars is the non-existent maintenance. there are no pulleys and belts to replace, no spark plugs or whatever, no oil to change, no radiator fluid to keep topped up, transmission fluid, etc. Just charge it and go. I like the idea of Hydrogen as a power source though, maybe a hydrogen powered charging station for EVs would be a good option for remote areas that lack big city EV charging infrastructure
Non-existent is far fetched. I would agree that the maintenance can be significantly lower. What exactly entails "maintenance?" Does tire wear count? The primary trade-off being that when there is maintenance, the average person probably won't be able to do it in their garage and they will be forced to go to the manufacturer. Tesla's 2021 impact report states the average lifespan of batteries is 200,000 miles.
I'm not against electric vehicles. In fact, I'd like to own one as soon as I can no longer maintain my 2004 Dodge Ram 1500. I love the fact that I'm the only one who has done maintenance on it. It's almost a test of how good my troubleshooting and repair skills can be.
Hydrogen is a really interesting route. It will be great for cargo trucks, and it could be really useful for everyday vehicles too. Moving the entire transportation industry to electric is going to be really tough, there needs to be hundreds of thousands of nee transmission lines and much more generation to accommodate charging networks
We will not need a lot more energy for EVs. We are already using a ton of energy to create gas. Hydrogen is no exception to this as well.
@@surreal5335 'gas' is generally imported from the middle east etc. The electricity you need to charge your EV ill be produced locally, hence the need for infrastructure investment
An ICEngine matched to a plug-in hybrid drivetrain could in theory deliver more than twice the equivalent MPG possible with H fuel cell EV tech. Toyota has produced two ICEngines that run on hydrogen, but NOT a fuel sipping ICEngine to operate even more effectively in a plug-in hybrid drivetrain. The LA Times published an article this century titled "The 500 mpg Solution" regrading plug-in hybrid tech. I guess Toyota just doesn't want to do it alone.
Not as much as you'd think.
It's laughable that ignorant politicians think the existing grids (which are extremely difficult to upgrade) can handle the extra load of charging all at the same time.
Let’s recall the guys who built an engine that works on the water. And they were killed. And eight other similar cases.
The problem is fuel storage. Same as batteries really. With fuel cells its not a problem but with Hydrogen combustion it's a big problem. I think you need a fuel tank something like 6 times the size as you would wirh gas. This could work for drag racing applications. We could all convert our SBCs to hydrogen etc.
There's a german company that solved that issue.
Not sure if they'll work with Toyota though