Frivolous? Remember in the late 90s? Toyota promised hydrogen cars when they were found behind on nimh tech? Then after they released the prius, they shoved the thing under like it never existed until again they found themselves behind on lithium ion tech.

It’s okay, NASA will pay Boeing money to make up for Boeings mistake. Just like how they secretly paid Boeing 300 million to slightly close in a delay Boeing themselves caused.

Of course they will. No one knows better how to navigate the government fleecing than Boeing and Lockheed.

Of course he is safe, he got 60 million for being fired!

SpaceX has 2 live streams, the general consumer live stream meant to promote space travel to everyone and the technical feed with no cheering and the like only focused on the mission.

Who knows, maybe the manual override would have failed.

Honda Clarity is a platform that includes PHEV, BEV and FCEV. More than likely you saw the PHEV version.

The Japanese and Korean governments have set requirements on manufacturers to pursue hydrogen. The whole 100 year plan thing is translation for, sure government, we are doing it we promise, *does something else that makes more sense*.

I know aluminum is way more common than lithium, all I was pointing out is lithium ion batteries don’t really have anything rare in them. The confusion of rarity comes from lack of production, not lack of availability. (to note, despite being called lithium ion, very little lithium is actually in it)

I will note one thing, lithium ion batteries are made out of all common elements. The confusion in rarity is that a lot of these elements like lithium and cobalt were rarely used before, so not many mines exist for them yet. But these are only short term shortages. As more and more mines are built, that issue will be…

hydrogen fuel cell tech is much much older than lithium ion tech and has yet to be “mastered”. Well in sense it has been mastered cause there isn’t much room for improvement as they hit theoretical limits.

No, the problem is that steam reformation is much much cheaper than electrolysis. Most of these stations you see doing electrolyses on renewable energy are PR stunts.

1) Yes, hydrogen would have us dependent on fossil fuels for another 50 extra years because the cost to make it out of fossil fuels is virtually 2x cheaper than making it out of renewable energy, in comparison, renewable energy for electricity is already cost competitive.

90% of hydrogen is made from fossil fuels, that is because the process of making it out of fossil fuels is cheaper and more efficient. It is estimated that reliance on hydrogen would have us dependent on fossil fuels for another 50 years.

You do realize our natural gas pipelines are a leaking mess. Hydrogen which is smaller is going to only be worse, even more so since tracking leaks of hydrogen is much harder.

Sure, you can generate it anywhere, but you need to generate A LOT OF IT. That is the problem. What many don’t realize is that hydrogen has terrible energy density by volume and needs to be compressed to 10,000 psi to fit in that still relatively large tank.

Hydrogen cars has had more investment than lion battery cars, the tech is also far older. But it got nowhere because it is impractical.

Then maybe they should have installed more efficient motors or larger batteries like Tesla?

Well that picture explains everything! Thanks!

1) The point is does it matter who is more wrong? (the argument you are trying to prove)