You do not have to hand it to Elon Musk. If home charging is the big benefit of BEVs, then why do “fast” charging stations have to get built everywhere? Tesla et al are just enshittifying refueling!

Shift? Dude that article has been debunked already.

https://thebusinessjournal.com/blog-harris-ranch-sets-record-straight-on-diesel-powered-tesla-supercharger-allegations/

A month after the Business Journal article, a Harris Ranch spokesperson confirmed that Tesla did set up diesel generators to power Superchargers for a time. So, it’s a thing that happens. Regardless, the point is that the energy in the gasoline and diesel fuel that goes into most of the fleet will still have to come from somewhere and there are no policies to make sure it comes from GHG-free sources.

Funny thing is that EVs are still cleaner than ICE even when powered by a Coal grid

https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikescott/2020/03/30/yes-electric-cars-are-cleaner-even-when-the-power-comes-from-coal/

If it’s not a problem for BEVs to run on electricity derived from coal, then it shouldn’t be a problem for FCEVs to run on hydrogen derived from natural gas. What I’m saying is that it doesn’t really matter how the energy from coal or natural gas eventually gets consumed. It’s a separate issue that we simply shouldn’t be burning any of that stuff.

Most of the hydrogen on market is made with methane.

EVs use whatever source is being given, and most of these sources are converting to renewables.

Not comparable imo.

As I explained in this reply, you can’t count on the grid’s energy mix improving or not getting worse as the vehicle fleet transitions to BEV. What you identify as a problem with FCEVs is really just bad energy policy that BEVs don’t solve either.

I actually kind of agree with you that the ideal BEV requires barely any new infrastructure. It should have a small battery that can support a daily commute and errands with slow charging at home overnight or during the day at work. Yet somehow these “fast” charging stations, which aren’t as fast or convenient as regular gas stations (and still run at least partially on fossil fuels anyway), have to get built everywhere. If we can’t get rid of these stations then let them be hydrogen stations.

As the transportation sector electrifies, how can you be so sure that the GHG-free portion of the grid’s electricity mix will stay the same or improve? Why wouldn’t the fossil fuels that currently power our vehicle fleet follow the demand and shift to powering the grid? BEVs only make a small portion of the cars on the road, but there’s evidence that this shift is already happening. So, while it might currently be the case that the hydrogen powering an FCEV was derived from natural gas, it’s also certainly possible that your BEV is effectively running on coal. I’m not trying to knock BEVs here. Rather, I’m making the point that the problem you’ve raised is one of energy policy, not FCEVs. Relying on BEVs to mitigate our current energy policy, instead of correcting the policy, is just going to create new problems.

As for recycling battery packs, yes, I’m aware that it’s a thing, but it’s not pretty. The best course is to minimize the amount of battery that needs to be dealt with in the first place.

Unfortunately, I think the other manufacturers are also following Tesla’s model of oversized batteries and software gimmicks.

That’s fair, but Musk has specifically complained about FCEVs before.

I don’t think transitioning to either predominantly BEVs or hydrogen powered vehicles really affects the energy mix since the electricity to charge BEVs also comes from natural gas. That said, the infrastructure to support fast charging for a predominantly BEV fleet isn’t there either, especially for cargo trucks.

I don’t know how the mineral ingredients of a fuel cell stack compare to a lithium battery, but assuming they’re the same, a fuel cell vehicle has significantly less of them. For example, the fuel cell stack in the Toyota Mirai weighs about 19kg and is complemented with a battery that weighs 45kg (1, 2). In comparison, the Tesla Model 3 carries a battery weighing 480kg. Therefore, a BEV has about 6.5x as much stuff of questionable origin (and questionable disposal requirements) as a FCEV.

We need hydrogen powered vehicles just to spite this guy, if nothing else.

I don’t know if they were the first, but they’re one of the most notorious offenders.

I have observed that myself with the infotainment system of my 2017 Golf Alltrack, but when did they start software derating their engines? My understanding is that there’s nothing much to be gained from an aftermarket ECU tune unless I switch to premium gas and the more powerful Golf models have other real differences like bigger turbochargers.

The businesses are launching a joint venture to develop platforms for “software-defined vehicles.”

Big oof.

Wouldn’t it make as much sense for him to have a Spanish accent?

If you’re not opposed to digital, then maybe you could set up an RSS feed reader to just update weekly. Or maybe you could just subscribe to weekly newsletters. Wouldn’t want you to get a paper cut.

I know this clock is kind of a silly, Burning Man brained idea, but I’m glad it’s happening. I guess I’m just a sucker.

New, official Spider-Man stories get released all the time. What’s stopping the writers from including a school shooting in a plot? Maybe they already have. Maybe school shootings aren’t a big problem in Queens (that’s where Peter Parker is from, right?).

I do care about facts, but relevance and context matter.

For sure. The fossil fuel industry is absolutely insidious.

This article is a little old, but it explains the problems on the disposal side pretty well. This one covers the production side. Hydrogen powered vehicles avoid all that.

That’s fascinating. Thank you for sharing. I guess these specific bacterial ecosystems would suffer, so to speak. Perhaps there should be rules to prevent oil and gas deposits from being completely depleted, or some could be set aside as nature preserves.