This blew me over !

[Las Palmas]

1 hour ago, Linas.P said:

Toyota really needs to either built it's own network (like Tesla Superchargers) or partner with somebody, because currently HCEV are chicken and egg situation. People don't buy them because there are no infrastructure and business does not want to build infrastructure because there is no demand to buy hydrogen. I know they doing something like that in Japan, but strange they haven't tried it in Europe.

And secondly they need to roll hydrogen for almost every model they have on sale, Mirai is just weird car which as cool as it is won't captivate the market for sure. They literally just need to pull the HCEV pack and put it into something like RX, ES, LC (which is basically on same platform as Mirai) and obviously all similar Toyota models, Prius (similar to Mirai 1), Corolla, RAV4 etc. etc. The needs to be choice of HCEV if they expect the technology to pick-up.

It really is too bad that the governments in the so-called civilized world are so hung up in short term solutions; money here and now - and future? What is that? It is in the future so never mind that. That way we are never going anywhere - except backwards.

Electric cars are great. Brushless motors last forever (have a 10-year-old blender that is still mixing whatever I put in it like when it was new) and all electric motors need to power a car is electricity. Batteries is a short time solution. Fuel cells can be recircled completely not like batteries, where most of the material will be landfill. Raw material for H2 is available abundant and return to its former state when it has been used. No self-discharge, can be stored and wherever electricity and water are available, H2 can be made.

Many places where it will be expensive to build and maintain electric wires for trains hydrogen is a solution starting to be used in other countries now.

[Las Palmas]

Hydrogen-Powered Passenger Trains Are Now Running in Germany

They’re expected to keep some 4,000 tons of carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere each year

In a bid to combat human-caused climate change, one state in Germany is rolling out a fleet of passenger trains powered entirely by hydrogen.

Five of these “zero-emissions” trains began running late last month in Lower Saxony, a state in the northern part of the country. And over the next year, the regional rail line intends to replace all its diesel-powered trains with this new alternative, reports the Points Guy’s Harriet Baskas.

Once all 14 of the new trains are in service, the line will become the first route to run exclusively on hydrogen, according to a statement from Alstom, the France-based company that developed the trains.

The high-tech trains, called Coradia iLint, combine hydrogen with oxygen to produce power. The byproducts are only steam and water, and any heat created gets recycled and used to power the trains’ air conditioning systems.

Diesel trains, on the other hand, produce high amounts of nitrogen dioxide pollution—even more so than cars traveling on busy streets, according to a study published last year. Developers say the new hydrogen trains are quiet, and they make the air cleaner for passengers to breathe.

“It’s less noisy,” says Bruno Marguet, an executive with Alstom, to Fast Company’s Adele Peters. “You don’t smell the diesel smoke when you’re in the station… there aren’t diesel emissions from [nitrogen oxides], which are harmful for health.”

Swapping out the diesel-powered trains along this Lower Saxony regional route should also keep more than 4,000 tons of carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere each year, reports Mark Hallam for Deutsche Welle (DW), a state-run broadcaster in Germany.

The trains can travel 621 miles (1,000 kilometers) on a single tank of hydrogen. And when they need to refuel, they’ll do so at a hydrogen filling station that crews built along the tracks. They can run at speeds of up to 86 miles per hour, but they typically stay between 50 and 75 miles per hour on this route.

European countries have electrified many train lines to eliminate the vehicles’ need for diesel. But that conversion process can be too expensive in some areas, particularly on lines that aren’t used as often, making the hydrogen trains a good alternative, per DW.

Lower Saxony began testing the hydrogen-powered trains on the regional rail line in 2018. Next, the state plans to eventually phase out all 126 of its trains that run on diesel.

"We will not buy any more diesel trains in order to do even more to combat climate change,” says Carmen Schwable, a spokeswoman for LNVG, the local public transit authority, to DW.

German government agencies spent around $92 million on the project, which is one of several installations that Alstom has planned in Europe. Soon, the new trains will expand to other parts of the country and beyond: Frankfurt, Germany, has ordered 27 trains for its metropolitan area, France intends to deploy 12 of them and the northern Lombardy region of Italy plans to add six.

Diesel-powered trains account for roughly 20 percent of all train journeys in Germany, and eventually, the country wants to replace 2,500 to 3,000 of its trains with hydrogen-powered alternatives.

Hydrogen isn’t a fix-all, however. Though it’s the most abundant element in the universe, hydrogen must be separated from other elements to be used to produce energy. Extraction typically involves non-renewable resources—namely, natural gas and fossil fuel-powered electricity—and some of the hydrogen used to power Germany’s new trains is produced with fossil fuels.

But within the next few years, the train operator aims to use hydrogen produced with local wind energy, per Fast Company—and elsewhere, other green energy sources could eventually help make hydrogen production more sustainable, too.

[Linas.P]

2 minutes ago, Las Palmas said:

It really is too bad that the governments in the so-called civilized world are so hung up in short term solutions; money here and now - and future? What is that? It is in the future so never mind that. That way we are never going anywhere - except backwards.

Electric cars are great. Brushless motors last forever (have a 10-year-old blender that is still mixing whatever I put in it like when it was new) and all electric motors need to power a car is electricity. Batteries is a short time solution. Fuel cells can be recircled completely not like batteries, where most of the material will be landfill. Raw material for H2 is available abundant and return to its former state when it has been used. No self-discharge, can be stored and wherever electricity and water are available, H2 can be made.

Many places where it will be expensive to build and maintain electric wires for trains hydrogen is a solution starting to be used in other countries now.

Hydrogen does self-discharge, by the means of venting excess pressure from time to time, this applies to both pressurised and liquified H2, but pressurised could last close to 3-6 months maybe even longer (kind of similar to petrol/ethanol) whereas liquified only lasts 15 days. But what they don't have is dreaded Battery degradation - HCEV will have same range after 10 years as the day you bought it (adjusted for general wear an tear).

I am less concerned about goverment short term thinking, but what concerns me is their long term impact. For example - subsidising BEVs and charging points is short term policy which may prove to be wrong and wasteful, but has no long term consequences, in fact subsidies are already cut a lot to the point where I am no longer annoyed by them. However, ban on ICEVs is extremely damaging thing with long term consequences and I personally believe government should not have power to decide on things like this, the can promote or discourage certain use, but they should not be able to ban one technology over another, it should be market to decide what works. If BEVs proves to be so good as EVangelists claim then nobody will buy ICEVs anyway and they will become obsolete naturally, they won't need to ban anything... but clearly it is not the case and the ban smells of desperation!

[Las Palmas]

5 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

I am less concerned about goverment short term thinking, but what concerns me is their long term impact.

The long term impact is what is coming from thinking short term.

Have read somewhere that hydrogen could be stored for years without losing power. Do not remember where, but this is also close enough:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_storage

[Linas.P]

39 minutes ago, Las Palmas said:

The long term impact is what is coming from thinking short term.

Have read somewhere that hydrogen could be stored for years without losing power. Do not remember where, but this is also close enough:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_storage

Not inside the small tanks in car, but in large tanks underground - yes that is correct.

[Shahpor]

There is another factor to consider here: The change of leadership at Toyota that is planned for April.

Many news outlets are saying that the new CEO is going to revamp the strategy to focus on EV's going forward, for example:

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a42673244/toyota-ceo-akio-toyoda-steps-down/

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/automakers-ev-surge-is-everything-everywhere-all-once-2023-01-26/

An exert from the above Reuters article:

"Toyota's incoming CEO, Koji Sato, faces a daunting task. He must accelerate the Japanese automaker's efforts to develop more competitive electric vehicles. But he will get little breathing room from Tesla or the Chinese EV manufacturers who are using their leads in EV technology and production costs to slash prices.

Tesla already earns roughly seven times as much per vehicle as Toyota. Its 17% pretax margins are roughly double the average for the rest of the industry. And after a rough 2022 for the company's shares, the stock has gained 28% to open up 2023."

The FT is saying that investors and Toyota's own leasing subsidiary are pushing for a shift to EV:

https://www.ft.com/content/d4bec71c-c787-4a76-b479-01ac63f5a427

All this suggests that a shift may be incoming.

Personally, I am not for or against hydrogen as a fuel source for cars.  In fact, I quite like the idea of hydrogen or synthetic fuel powered vehicles, but if I am being honest, I genuinely don't see hydrogen working out as an alternative to EV powered cars.  The main reason behind this belief is that I feel Toyota is the key to it being developed as a viable technology and all signs point to them wavering now.

Perhaps I am wrong, and time will tell, but as I said in my previous post, I feel that if more than 5 years go by without a breakthrough in hydrogen technology then EV's will win by default.

[wharfhouse]

59 minutes ago, Shahpor said:

There is another factor to consider here: The change of leadership at Toyota that is planned for April.

Many news outlets are saying that the new CEO is going to revamp the strategy to focus on EV's going forward, for example:

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a42673244/toyota-ceo-akio-toyoda-steps-down/

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/automakers-ev-surge-is-everything-everywhere-all-once-2023-01-26/

An exert from the above Reuters article:

"Toyota's incoming CEO, Koji Sato, faces a daunting task. He must accelerate the Japanese automaker's efforts to develop more competitive electric vehicles. But he will get little breathing room from Tesla or the Chinese EV manufacturers who are using their leads in EV technology and production costs to slash prices.

Tesla already earns roughly seven times as much per vehicle as Toyota. Its 17% pretax margins are roughly double the average for the rest of the industry. And after a rough 2022 for the company's shares, the stock has gained 28% to open up 2023."

The FT is saying that investors and Toyota's own leasing subsidiary are pushing for a shift to EV:

https://www.ft.com/content/d4bec71c-c787-4a76-b479-01ac63f5a427

All this suggests that a shift may be incoming.

Personally, I am not for or against hydrogen as a fuel source for cars.  In fact, I quite like the idea of hydrogen or synthetic fuel powered vehicles, but if I am being honest, I genuinely don't see hydrogen working out as an alternative to EV powered cars.  The main reason behind this belief is that I feel Toyota is the key to it being developed as a viable technology and all signs point to them wavering now.

Perhaps I am wrong, and time will tell, but as I said in my previous post, I feel that if more than 5 years go by without a breakthrough in hydrogen technology then EV's will win by default.

To be fair that's the media speculating based on how they see the EV market. I suspect Toyota has long term internal plans that no-one else is party too. The only real comment from Toyota was that the existing CEO was stepping aside (in fact moving to be Chairman) as he felt a new younger CEO and team should take the company forwards. And the new CEO is from Lexus - so how much will that really change the direction? 

[Las Palmas]

1 hour ago, Linas.P said:

Not inside the small tanks in car, but in large tanks underground - yes that is correct.

That is a big difference between storing power in hydrogen and batteries. In windy times too much energy is sometimes produced and sunny days also give much energy. Should somebody wake up and start using the constant tide that is of enormous power, more or less minimal polluting power could be available and when not all needed some could be stored better than put into batteries.

[Malc1]

58 minutes ago, Las Palmas said:

the constant tide that is of enormous power, more or less minimal polluting power

I'm understanding that Tidal Power is amazingly brilliant but oh so challenging to develop the technology to effectiveness

They say there's a Tidal Power plant in Wales and the technology is immensely, surprisingly, challenging BUT  the UK has an enormous coastal tidal potential powerbase and hopefully someone soon will develop the positive outcome for the UK

Malc

[Malc1]

3 hours ago, Mr Vlad said:

I'm sorry you had to lay off staff during covid Malc. Not sure what your business was/is But on the flip side I worked for a company delivering fruit and veg to schools. 95% of the business went. Did my employer lay any of us off? NO. Why? Coz he got the government pay scheme thing. Why didn't you? 

an on-line ( mainly flight only ) travel agency business with 6 staff in Delhi that had to be laid off, our rented premises went too but the business continued, just about in name only during the whole covid period

Now back up and running with fresh premises and 8 staff .  so it's beginning to come back with some people happy to travel .....  our market is mainly UK pax

Hard-up people, pax,  don't make for a profitable business too quickly ....  and strikers will have more time but less money to be able to afford to go travelling .....  let alone not forgetting disease and pestilence is still quite rife around the world still even if we in the UK seem to be all ok healthwise right now mostly ..  fingers xd

Malc

[Las Palmas]

1 hour ago, Malc1 said:

I'm understanding that Tidal Power is amazingly brilliant but oh so challenging to develop the technology to effectiveness

They say there's a Tidal Power plant in Wales and the technology is immensely, surprisingly, challenging BUT  the UK has an enormous coastal tidal potential powerbase and hopefully someone soon will develop the positive outcome for the UK

Malc

Using tidal power is a very old idea. Why none are using the enormous power source is hard to understand. Or maybe not.

All is complicated till it is done.  And this is one of the simple ones. Same system as water running down from mountains, making electricity extremely cheap in Norway and Sweden, except here it runs both ways.

[Las Palmas]

1 hour ago, Malc1 said:

Now back up and running with fresh premises and 8 staff .  so it's beginning to come back with some people happy to travel .....  our market is mainly UK pax

I was in the airport here some weeks ago to pick up a family member from the cold north that wanted to have some sunshine. Airplane come one after another and mainly with tourists, and very many were speaking English I heard while waiting. The biggest mall chain is called El Corte Ingles for some reason I suppose. Lots of English-speaking people live on the south of the island here. During Covid time no airplanes were to see in the air, but now they are there all the time.

[Malc1]

3 minutes ago, Las Palmas said:

but now they are there all the time.

and the first flights, a short few weeks back now, that landed in Italy rom China following the Chinese Govt covid relaxation rules resulted in 50% of the pax arriving with covid  !

Chinese tourists now abound in their droves and want to visit everywhere whenever they can 

just got to be so so careful still everyone   🥲

Malc

[Las Palmas]

2 minutes ago, Malc1 said:

and the first flights, a short few weeks back now, that landed in Italy rom China following the Chinese Govt covid relaxation rules resulted in 50% of the pax arriving with covid  !

Chinese tourists now abound in their droves and want to visit everywhere whenever they can 

just got to be so so careful still everyone   🥲

Malc

Yes, and here, like most places, masks are no longer mandatory except in hospitals. Denmark is no longer offering booster shots free. Believe we are not well prepared for next pandemic.

[dutchie01]

 

[Mr Vlad]

Sorry Bernard but that video is over a year old and in that year so much has changed. That video stated it cost 80 dollars to fill with 6kg of hydrogen. I posted a much newer video where to fill a Toyota Mirai was the same as to fill a petrol equivalent. 

He mentioned 5 reasons why hydrogen has failed. But hydrogen hasn't failed. 

His first reason was Price. Irrelevant as its on par with similar ice cars.

2nd Convenience. Didn't watch from there onwards because I saw it was an old out of date video. But anyway convenience. As far as I'm concerned they're very convenient. 

3rd Performance. You don't buy a car like the Mirai for Performance so this 3rd reason is a farce.

4th Environment. Crikey. Water comes out of the zorst.

5th Competition. Now that's a ruddy good point. Major manufacturers are in a kind of limbo nowadays I'd reckon what with new technologies regarding hydrogen manufacturer and electricity infrastructure not really up to thousands of high charge rate EV chargers and their lack of reliability. 

I've a lot of time on my hands being off on sick. I'm seeing the very latest videos on cars and how we are going to drive. I posted a video today what's the problem with EV'S. Watch it. My car is 15 years young. It'll still be on the road in 15 years time God willing with my health and life.

Can't see an EV from today on the road in 30 years time. It'll be a totally new power to propel cars.

[Mr Vlad]

Blimey John. You started this thread. Have you fallen into a deep sleep? Where's your input? 😁

[Las Palmas]

2 hours ago, dutchie01 said:

 

Great video. If you want a loudspeaker and a donut beanie.

The guy was right. Hydrogen cars are not the solution today; one year ago, or more when the video was made there were more reasons, but today only one of these are still there. Lack of hydrogen pumps for hydrogen cars. And some places they are coming soon, other places much later. Actually, one more thing is correct: Hydrogen is today made from same polluting power as electric cars: Electricity made from gas and oil and some places even coal. UHH. That make the electricity to make hydrogen as bad as the electricity put in electric Battery powered cars.  I Germany 3 rather big companies are investing heavily in producing electricity from wind and solar cells to make hydrogen. Why not to electric cars? These companies believe that a fuel that return to the state it came from (water) is better than putting it into batteries that needs to be replaced before the life of the engines using the hydrogen. Makes sense?

Much has happened in a year and more will happen in coming years.

Hydrogen cars will be available in shorter time than many expect. I believe that long before 2030 when combustion engine cars are to be banned by stupid narrow and short-sighted politicians' hydrogen cars will be coming because one major gasoline and diesel company (in Germany) are planning something that so far is not official, but still talked about, - and they are not alone. The company that is in talk about delivering hydrogen to pumps in Germany first, from, if not clean at least much cleaner sources, is in talk with more companies about delivering hydrogen.

Trains are now transporting passengers and goods powered with hydrogen.

Much has happened in just one little year.

[Las Palmas]

41 minutes ago, Mr Vlad said:

Blimey John. You started this thread. Have you fallen into a deep sleep? Where's your input? 😁

On 1/28/2023 at 4:58 PM, royoftherovers said:

https://jalopnik.com/toyota-and-yamaha-are-developing-a-455-hp-v8-that-runs-1848561318

Correct Vladimir,

where are you John?

You started the thread with a powerful engine, that actually can run on hydrogen and I see great potential for that engine in marine world. Private owned normal sized yachts would be well powered with such a monster. A little too big for small family cars, I think.

[dutchie01]

I am just a simple consumer and do not have enough knowledge about Hydro, BEV or even ICE powered cars. I just buy a car every now and then and choose what suits me best at that moment. I am member of the LOC as i am interested apparently more then the general public, like all of us. I do know little about economics and based on what i can pick i can only conclude that Hydro powered passenger cars are dead. The automotive sector has chosen. The ship has sailed, the train has left the station. Hydro is not a new technology in the car world. R&D departments try to look 15 years ahead and for instance BMW had prototypes on the road already back in 2000. So, why did it never took on? well you can fill in the reasons yourself i guess. I can see it working in boats, trucks, agricultural big machines etc, but passenger cars will be Battery electric powered and that is it.

In another thread i posted an interesting article about Toyota missing the boat big time and one can argue about the percentages and figures correct or not but there was one remark that made me think. + There will be a moment that the public starts buying BEVs as they are afraid of putting their money in ICE that will disappear. I personally have to buy a private car latest next year we want to keep driving after my retirement and i am thinking of that. What if next year i buy a petrolcar and drive it for i do not know some 8 years. By then the market will be fully electric and nobody wants my car so i loose my money?? 

I like driving an electric better that driving a 4 cylinder turbo engine and charging over here is just a non issue with chargers every where. Shell announced that operating a electric petrol station (??) is more profitable than a traditional one. Less maintenance, all automated, people stay longer so buy more and money can be made on the electricity. So guess what they are building chargers everywhere. Fast charging more expensive that slow. Look at the situation 3 years ago compare to now and 3 years from now.

[Malc1]

this is going to be totally " dynamic " and refreshing changes in automotive propulsion will be appearing from time to time ......  and a 12 month is a long time in this industry

Malc

[Linas.P]

1 hour ago, dutchie01 said:

I am just a simple consumer and do not have enough knowledge about Hydro, BEV or even ICE powered cars. I just buy a car every now and then and choose what suits me best at that moment. I am member of the LOC as i am interested apparently more then the general public, like all of us. I do know little about economics and based on what i can pick i can only conclude that Hydro powered passenger cars are dead. The automotive sector has chosen. The ship has sailed, the train has left the station. Hydro is not a new technology in the car world. R&D departments try to look 15 years ahead and for instance BMW had prototypes on the road already back in 2000. So, why did it never took on? well you can fill in the reasons yourself i guess. I can see it working in boats, trucks, agricultural big machines etc, but passenger cars will be battery electric powered and that is it.

In another thread i posted an interesting article about Toyota missing the boat big time and one can argue about the percentages and figures correct or not but there was one remark that made me think. + There will be a moment that the public starts buying BEVs as they are afraid of putting their money in ICE that will disappear. I personally have to buy a private car latest next year we want to keep driving after my retirement and i am thinking of that. What if next year i buy a petrolcar and drive it for i do not know some 8 years. By then the market will be fully electric and nobody wants my car so i loose my money?? 

I like driving an electric better that driving a 4 cylinder turbo engine and charging over here is just a non issue with chargers every where. Shell announced that operating a electric petrol station (??) is more profitable than a traditional one. Less maintenance, all automated, people stay longer so buy more and money can be made on the electricity. So guess what they are building chargers everywhere. Fast charging more expensive that slow. Look at the situation 3 years ago compare to now and 3 years from now.

If we talking about hydrogen combustion - then yes 100% agree. If we talking about hydrogen fuel cell, then I am not so sure. I think technology is there but BEV scam prevented it from getting off the ground as much as it should have (I would expect hydrogen to be on par with Battery electric otherwise). Is it same as saying "HCEV is dead"? No I don't think so... if Toyota would think it is dead then they would have pulled the plug from the project, yet they still developing... if BMW would have thought it is dead they wouldn't have collaborated with Toyota on Zupra (they got hydrogen tech in exchange), the BMW hydrogen combustion tech was available in 2000s, but that is why it died and why they wanted to get Toyota tech, because hydrogen combustion as I said and as it clear from sources is dead end.

For me it fells hydrogen fuel cell tech will remain and will continue to get developed for foreseeable future, it won't be mainstream, it will only be developed in few countries - Japan, China, California (state), Korea, perhaps few more... but it will tick along. I think we could compare it to LPG - Netherlands was the only country in Europe where it really took off (for new cars, excluding conversions). But you know it is still around - ~27 million vehicles worldwide. So I expect hydrogen to follow similar trend, it is small market, but it is big enough to be sustainable. Last year 68k (72% increase year over year) hydrogen cars were sold worldwide, not massive but at the same time I doubt Toyota would just drop offer which could sell nearly 70k cars especially where clear trend is that segment is growing.

Yesterday I watched one interesting video... to summarise - HCEV is good idea but won't be mainstream. Main issue - iridium and Platinum required for catalyst. In other hand it is same issue as BEV - Lithium and Cobalt... All 4 are limited resources we simply don't have enough to use either technology as full replacement for ICEVs and fossil fuels. The other problem which I disagree with is "colours" of hydrogen... basically most of it at the moment is by-product of fossil fuel production, thus not green (more polluting than petrol), making it on renewable energy is not economical and the only option is to make it using nuclear energy (so called "pink hydrogen"), the video concluded that nuclear energy is not popular, but I still think that will be the way we will make hydrogen in future and therefore I don't see an issue in producing carbon neutral hydrogen... but platinum and iridium will be an issue for sure! 

[Spacewagon52]

34 minutes ago, dutchie01 said:

I am just a simple consumer and do not have enough knowledge about Hydro, BEV or even ICE powered cars. I just buy a car every now and then and choose what suits me best at that moment. I am member of the LOC as i am interested apparently more then the general public, like all of us. I do know little about economics and based on what i can pick i can only conclude that Hydro powered passenger cars are dead. The automotive sector has chosen. The ship has sailed, the train has left the station. Hydro is not a new technology in the car world. R&D departments try to look 15 years ahead and for instance BMW had prototypes on the road already back in 2000. So, why did it never took on? well you can fill in the reasons yourself i guess. I can see it working in boats, trucks, agricultural big machines etc, but passenger cars will be battery electric powered and that is it.

In another thread i posted an interesting article about Toyota missing the boat big time and one can argue about the percentages and figures correct or not but there was one remark that made me think. + There will be a moment that the public starts buying BEVs as they are afraid of putting their money in ICE that will disappear. I personally have to buy a private car latest next year we want to keep driving after my retirement and i am thinking of that. What if next year i buy a petrolcar and drive it for i do not know some 8 years. By then the market will be fully electric and nobody wants my car so i loose my money?? 

I like driving an electric better that driving a 4 cylinder turbo engine and charging over here is just a non issue with chargers every where. Shell announced that operating a electric petrol station (??) is more profitable than a traditional one. Less maintenance, all automated, people stay longer so buy more and money can be made on the electricity. So guess what they are building chargers everywhere. Fast charging more expensive that slow. Look at the situation 3 years ago compare to now and 3 years from now.

I feel you have made some very interesting points Bernard. As we have experienced with diesel cars, the wind can change rather quickly. 

"I can see it working in boats, trucks, agricultural big machines etc, but passenger cars will be Battery electric powered and that is it."

I would add to your prediction that there will be a half-way house for many people, using Plug-in Hybrids. I suggest this is not a good time to buy a new car with any certainty. Budget constraints, for most people, prevent them even considering an electric or plug-in hybrid.

If you can afford a new, or nearly new, car it is not a straightforward choice. I decided to stick with what I know, time will tell if it was the right decision.

[Spacewagon52]

26 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

If we talking about hydrogen combustion - then yes 100% agree. If we talking about hydrogen fuel cell, then I am not so sure. I think technology is there but BEV scam prevented it from getting off the ground as much as it should have (I would expect hydrogen to be on par with battery electric otherwise). Is it same as saying "HCEV is dead"? No I don't think so... if Toyota would think it is dead then they would have pulled the plug from the project, yet they still developing... if BMW would have thought it is dead they wouldn't have collaborated with Toyota on Zupra (they got hydrogen tech in exchange), the BMW hydrogen combustion tech was available in 2000s, but that is why it died and why they wanted to get Toyota tech, because hydrogen combustion as I said and as it clear from sources is dead end.

For me it fells hydrogen fuel cell tech will remain and will continue to get developed for foreseeable future, it won't be mainstream, it will only be developed in few countries - Japan, China, California (state), Korea, perhaps few more... but it will tick along. I think we could compare it to LPG - Netherlands was the only country in Europe where it really took off (for new cars, excluding conversions). But you know it is still around - ~27 million vehicles worldwide. So I expect hydrogen to follow similar trend, it is small market, but it is big enough to be sustainable. Last year 68k (72% increase year over year) hydrogen cars were sold worldwide, not massive but at the same time I doubt Toyota would just drop offer which could sell nearly 70k cars especially where clear trend is that segment is growing.

Yesterday I watched one interesting video... to summarise - HCEV is good idea but won't be mainstream. Main issue - Iridium and Platinum required for catalyst. In other hand it is same issue as BEV - Lithium and Cobalt... All 4 are limited resources we simply don't have enough to use either technology as full replacement for ICEVs and fossil fuels. The other problem which I disagree with is "colours" of hydrogen... basically most of it at the moment is by-product of fossil fuel production, thus not green (more polluting than petrol), making it on renewable energy is not economical and the only option is to make it using nuclear energy (so called "pink hydrogen"), the video concluded that nuclear energy is not popular, but I still think that will be the way we will make hydrogen in future and therefore I don't see an issue in producing carbon neutral hydrogen... but platinum and iridium will be an issue for sure! 

What is HCEV? I Googled and it said Hepatitis!

I was under the impression burning hydrogen did not need catalysts????

[DBIZO]

48 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

If we talking about hydrogen combustion - then yes 100% agree. If we talking about hydrogen fuel cell, then I am not so sure. I think technology is there but BEV scam prevented it from getting off the ground as much as it should have (I would expect hydrogen to be on par with battery electric otherwise). Is it same as saying "HCEV is dead"? No I don't think so... if Toyota would think it is dead then they would have pulled the plug from the project, yet they still developing... if BMW would have thought it is dead they wouldn't have collaborated with Toyota on Zupra (they got hydrogen tech in exchange), the BMW hydrogen combustion tech was available in 2000s, but that is why it died and why they wanted to get Toyota tech, because hydrogen combustion as I said and as it clear from sources is dead end.

For me it fells hydrogen fuel cell tech will remain and will continue to get developed for foreseeable future, it won't be mainstream, it will only be developed in few countries - Japan, China, California (state), Korea, perhaps few more... but it will tick along. I think we could compare it to LPG - Netherlands was the only country in Europe where it really took off (for new cars, excluding conversions). But you know it is still around - ~27 million vehicles worldwide. So I expect hydrogen to follow similar trend, it is small market, but it is big enough to be sustainable. Last year 68k (72% increase year over year) hydrogen cars were sold worldwide, not massive but at the same time I doubt Toyota would just drop offer which could sell nearly 70k cars especially where clear trend is that segment is growing.

Yesterday I watched one interesting video... to summarise - HCEV is good idea but won't be mainstream. Main issue - Iridium and Platinum required for catalyst. In other hand it is same issue as BEV - Lithium and Cobalt... All 4 are limited resources we simply don't have enough to use either technology as full replacement for ICEVs and fossil fuels. The other problem which I disagree with is "colours" of hydrogen... basically most of it at the moment is by-product of fossil fuel production, thus not green (more polluting than petrol), making it on renewable energy is not economical and the only option is to make it using nuclear energy (so called "pink hydrogen"), the video concluded that nuclear energy is not popular, but I still think that will be the way we will make hydrogen in future and therefore I don't see an issue in producing carbon neutral hydrogen... but platinum and iridium will be an issue for sure! 

A friend looked at a similar dilemma recently, and ended up with a plugin. I'm not sure it's that much of a major dilemma at all for resale value. After 8 years, you lost probably 70-75% of your money with a typical car anyway. You're also making the assumption that an 8-year old EV would not depreciate just as much. One could argue it will lose more value for three major reasons: more expensive to begin with; batteries do wear out and at year 8, it could be at significantly reduced capacity eg. 70-80% of design; and because EV cars are evolving faster for now, so a new EVs in 8 years will be considerably more attractive to buyers than a 2023 model.

Also at the risk of stating the obvious, if you maintain that car, particularly a Lexus, it will be a solid, good car even after 8 years as most on this forum will attest to. Mine is approaching 8 years this years and will be past 100k, and not the slightest thing wrong with it, would pick it over most newer cars, including most if not all EVs.

If you're thinking resale value, buy a car with a NA V8...in 10 years' time, there will be a riot for them.

 

(meant to respond to Dutchie's post)