> they knew the upper limits or max value of this renewable wind power.
We also know the upper limits for solar. And for the current battery tech. And solid state battery tech. And the theoretical max for any battery that still follows the laws of physics as we know them. Your point being?
Hydrogen makes very little sense. Or rather, it only makes sense to keep the demand for fossil fuels high - because this is the cheapest way to get hydrogen (see natural gas reforming). Electrolysis is inefficient and expensive.
Not to mention the infrastructure required to compress/liquefy, ship, and building refueling stations.
All that for what? To feed it to a fuel cell and get electricity back. Just use the electricity to charge a battery and skip all the middle men.
If you have electricity, you are better off using batteries. The energy grid will likely be available close to you, transportation is taken care of. At the end of their useful lives, batteries can be recycled and we get most of the material back.
Due to hydrogen embrittlement, hydrogen tanks also have a shelf life.
This has little to do with physics and more to do with incentives from the fossil fuel industry.
That is Elon's talking point. He isn't a technical person. He bought Tesla and scrubbed the founder's name for business storytelling purposes. So natural gas produces hydrogen, this hydrogen is stored in a tank, and then converted to electric when it is used. There is no 2 step process but Elon dismissed this technology for this reason. I don't trust this guy. There is nothing he knows that the Japanese carmakers don't. I am only suspicious that the Model 3 is cheaper than the Mirai. It might be a short term play that I don't fully understand in the same way I don't understand have Citadel and Virtu make money from buying trades. However, I think they are up to no good.
We also know the upper limits for solar. And for the current battery tech. And solid state battery tech. And the theoretical max for any battery that still follows the laws of physics as we know them. Your point being?
Hydrogen makes very little sense. Or rather, it only makes sense to keep the demand for fossil fuels high - because this is the cheapest way to get hydrogen (see natural gas reforming). Electrolysis is inefficient and expensive.
Not to mention the infrastructure required to compress/liquefy, ship, and building refueling stations.
All that for what? To feed it to a fuel cell and get electricity back. Just use the electricity to charge a battery and skip all the middle men.
If you have electricity, you are better off using batteries. The energy grid will likely be available close to you, transportation is taken care of. At the end of their useful lives, batteries can be recycled and we get most of the material back.
Due to hydrogen embrittlement, hydrogen tanks also have a shelf life.
This has little to do with physics and more to do with incentives from the fossil fuel industry.