patrick.net

John Bailo says

In fact, in the case of the hydrogen-filled Hindenburg, most of the fire and resulting devastation was the result of diesel fuel for the airship's engines and a flammable lacquer coating on the outside of the dirigible.

Pyrite in the paint that was used on the canvas to help make it airtight.

Remarkably, hydrogen cars manage to suck completely without catching fire.

They're called laws of thermodynamics for a reason, and they are far more strictly enforced than human laws.

To power vehicle wheels from the sun or the grid via hydrogen (electrolysis, compression, storage, burn) means losing 75%-80% of the input energy, versus losing 20%-25% for a battery-driven vehicle.

This is based on the laws of physics, which limit hydrogen but not battery vehicles. So, theoretically, battery vehicles can still improve (in capacity and efficiency) while hydrogen never will.

See? Complete, dismal abject suckage just on the theory alone! I didn't even have to go discuss the shitty current state of fuel-cell technology.

It's remarkable that something can suck so bad even at the textbook level. Hydrogen technology is truly a champ!

HydroCabron says

They're called laws of thermodynamics for a reason, and they are far more strictly enforced than human laws.

The Laws of Thermodynamics is a Zionist conspiracy; The Zionist-Arabs and Zionist-Russians and Zionist-Texans are concealing the truth about Cold Fusion, Hydrogen Power, Sandy Hook, and the Moon Landing to keep a carbon fuel based economy going.

thunderlips11 says

HydroCabron says

They're called laws of thermodynamics for a reason, and they are far more strictly enforced than human laws.

The Laws of Thermodynamics is a Zionist conspiracy; The Zionist-Arabs and Zionist-Russians and Zionist-Texans are concealing the truth about Cold Fusion, Hydrogen Power, Sandy Hook, and the Moon Landing to keep a carbon fuel based economy going.

The Ukies paid you to say that.

HydroCabron says

To power vehicle wheels from the sun or the grid via hydrogen (electrolysis, compression, storage, burn) means losing 75%-80% of the input energy, versus losing 20%-25% for a battery-driven vehicle.

This is based on the laws of physics, which limit hydrogen but not battery vehicles. So, theoretically, battery vehicles can still improve (in capacity and efficiency) while hydrogen never will.

I presume you are talking purely about the losses incurred in the transportation and storage of energy? That is the input being 100% electrical energy at some centralized generator and the output electrical power at the motor?

It would be helpful to list the losses and percent loss for each step. Only then will it be clear how lossy hydrogen is as an energy storage medium.