Hyperion XP-1

[Spuds]

If this pans out, it could be pretty cool. Not just the hypercar, but the infrastructure technology to make it happen.

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a3...ypercar-specs/

[soundman98]

the concept of 'burning' water is really still the sticking point that bothers me the most about hydrogen usage. it's cleaner than gasoline, absolutely, but it's considered infinite the same way gasoline was once considered infinite...

not to mention that everything with hydrogen has a hard expiration date at 10 years from the date of manufacture...

[NoHaveMSG]

Is this guy the CEO?


And if so, why is the car not called "The Butt Stallion"

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by soundman98

the concept of 'burning' water is really still the sticking point that bothers me the most about hydrogen usage. it's cleaner than gasoline, absolutely, but it's considered infinite the same way gasoline was once considered infinite...

not to mention that everything with hydrogen has a hard expiration date at 10 years from the date of manufacture...

Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe. So we won't run out any time soon. The byproduct of a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle is water, and the hydrogen is extracted from water, so we aren't likely to run out of that anytime soon...

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by NoHaveMSG

Is this guy the CEO?


And if so, why is the car not called "The Butt Stallion"

I don't get the reference. Looks like borderlands?

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Spuds

Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe. So we won't run out any time soon. The byproduct of a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle is water, and the hydrogen is extracted from water, so we aren't likely to run out of that anytime soon...

I think battery technology will advance enough to make hydrogen a non-starter for everyday cars.

The two primary uses of hydrogen would be for towing like for long distance semis or for towing boats or trailers behind household trucks. The other is with racing where large batteries hinder performance and refilling a hydrogen sports car would allow for longer races. Even if we had solid state batteries that were dense and light, there might be an advantage to go with hydrogen, especially for endurance racing.

The general problem with hydrogen as a fuel source if that it takes more energy to send a hydrogen car 100 miles down the road than a pure electric car, so we would need to build more utility plants. The other problem is that the infrastructure to supply hydrogen fuel is more complex and costly than electric charging stations. Another is making the fuel and storing it because it is leaky. Hydrogen is the most abundant element, but isolating it from certain finite sources is the issue. Right now, the majority of it (95%) comes from steam reforming, which uses methane, which is good, but also uses fossil fuels and produces carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide, which is not good. Electrolysis of water isn't exactly better because fresh water is limited and desalination is expensive and inherently wasteful. If we had a plentiful supply of free energy in the form of solar, wind, nuclear, water, geothermal, etc then it would make sense, but hydrogen looks less feasible than standard electric cars. Maybe someday it will make more sense.

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

I think battery technology will advance enough to make hydrogen a non-starter for everyday cars.

The two primary uses of hydrogen would be for towing like for long distance semis or for towing boats or trailers behind household trucks. The other is with racing where large batteries hinder performance and refilling a hydrogen sports car would allow for longer races. Even if we had solid state batteries that were dense and light, there might be an advantage to go with hydrogen, especially for endurance racing.

The general problem with hydrogen as a fuel source if that it takes more energy to send a hydrogen car 100 miles down the road than a pure electric car, so we would need to build more utility plants. The other problem is that the infrastructure to supply hydrogen fuel is more complex and costly than electric charging stations. Another is making the fuel and storing it because it is leaky. Hydrogen is the most abundant element, but isolating it from certain finite sources is the issue. Right now, the majority of it (95%) comes from steam reforming, which uses methane, which is good, but also uses fossil fuels and produces carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide, which is not good. Electrolysis of water isn't exactly better because fresh water is limited and desalination is expensive and inherently wasteful. If we had a plentiful supply of free energy in the form of solar, wind, nuclear, water, geothermal, etc then it would make sense, but hydrogen looks less feasible than standard electric cars. Maybe someday it will make more sense.

I honestly haven't done the math, but gut feeling is that a hydrogen-powered car with a small battery is going to be just as efficient as a battery-only car that has a battery big enough for practical travel due to size and weight.

In terms of fresh water being limited, it's only limited in certain places. Have you seen the great lakes, or the Mississippi River, or the Hudson River, etc? There are plenty of huge fresh water sources that are not in danger of running out, and they get replenished every day.

I agree on the idea that we need better ways of producing energy, but EVs powered by Hydrogen fit better into society right now than battery EVs. And having the best technology means nothing if nobody uses it. Greater focus on hydrogen would increase adoption of EVs IMO.

[NoHaveMSG]

Originally Posted by Spuds

I don't get the reference. Looks like borderlands?

Yes. Hyperion corporation and their CEO are the main antagonist.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Spuds

I honestly haven't done the math, but gut feeling is that a hydrogen-powered car with a small battery is going to be just as efficient as a battery-only car that has a battery big enough for practical travel due to size and weight.

In terms of fresh water being limited, it's only limited in certain places. Have you seen the great lakes, or the Mississippi River, or the Hudson River, etc? There are plenty of huge fresh water sources that are not in danger of running out, and they get replenished every day.

I agree on the idea that we need better ways of producing energy, but EVs powered by Hydrogen fit better into society right now than battery EVs. And having the best technology means nothing if nobody uses it. Greater focus on hydrogen would increase adoption of EVs IMO.

I see what you are saying, but the converse of that is that the battery EV doesn't have a hydrogen converting fuel cell or a hydrogen tank or other associated hardware. The other thing is that hydrogen works for range anxiety, but the average person doesn't need a Telsa sized battery; they just want a Tesla sized battery. In time, people may realize it is overkill.


By the time the infrastructure is made for hydrogen, battery technology might already make hydrogen obsolete. If we invested the same money that we would in hydrogen instead in EV charging locations and nuclear for generating electricity then we would probably be better off.

[soundman98]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

I think battery technology will advance enough to make hydrogen a non-starter for everyday cars.

The two primary uses of hydrogen would be for towing like for long distance semis or for towing boats or trailers behind household trucks. The other is with racing where large batteries hinder performance and refilling a hydrogen sports car would allow for longer races. Even if we had solid state batteries that were dense and light, there might be an advantage to go with hydrogen, especially for endurance racing.

The general problem with hydrogen as a fuel source if that it takes more energy to send a hydrogen car 100 miles down the road than a pure electric car, so we would need to build more utility plants. The other problem is that the infrastructure to supply hydrogen fuel is more complex and costly than electric charging stations. Another is making the fuel and storing it because it is leaky. Hydrogen is the most abundant element, but isolating it from certain finite sources is the issue. Right now, the majority of it (95%) comes from steam reforming, which uses methane, which is good, but also uses fossil fuels and produces carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide, which is not good. Electrolysis of water isn't exactly better because fresh water is limited and desalination is expensive and inherently wasteful. If we had a plentiful supply of free energy in the form of solar, wind, nuclear, water, geothermal, etc then it would make sense, but hydrogen looks less feasible than standard electric cars. Maybe someday it will make more sense.

considering california's current predicament with rolling blackouts, i'm more in support of hydrogen for the energy diversity benefits. because electric cars are only going to make the current problems worse.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by soundman98

considering california's current predicament with rolling blackouts, i'm more in support of hydrogen for the energy diversity benefits. because electric cars are only going to make the current problems worse.

Nuclear is the answer.

Hydrogen is made mostly using natural gas. Energy derived from whatever source is used to heat natural gas to create hydrogen, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide, which then gets stored in a fuel tank in a car to later make energy to charge a battery. Not exactly efficient. Not exactly green either.

We can just burn natural gas to create electricity, which can charge batteries directly. That is better than heating natural gas to create hydrogen to then make electricity. Cut out the hydrogen middle man and reduce expenses and energy losses. Burning natural gas isn’t as green as nuclear, but it is better than burning coal to make electricity.

And now we come full circle. Nuclear is always the answer. Call it NIATA for your future electric MIATA.

[Jordanwolf]

Me want this...



Me give money..

[soundman98]

Originally Posted by Jordanwolf

Me want this...



Me give money..

entry fee is a 4-duffel bag minimum. you appear to be 1 duffel bag right now. please return at a later date.

[WolfpackS2k]

Nuclear is the answer.

And battery storage of energy is not. Think about how many resources must be mined and manufactured for batteries...that have a finite life. It's a hugely wasteful endeavor that is NOT good for the planet.