Originally posted by sonhouse
And there is STILL a push for H2 since the infrastructure is mostly the same as petrol stations, same kind of idea just a different fluid with different technological costs.
The push has largely died down with only a few small pockets of people trying desperately to hold on to what is obviously a failed idea (and was stupid 20 years ago, but arguably less so than now).
H2 + electric seems better than petrol + electric though.
Except it isn't. Right now, we are not quite a the point where pure electric beats petrol for all circumstances. But in 10 years, electric will rule supreme. It would be stupid to build H2 stations country wide for a <10 year use.
If photocells get up to 60% like people are saying, then cells on cars also can extend the range of pure electrics without needing H2 OR petrol.
Higher capacity batteries and faster charging are the real solution. Solar cells on cars are a highly unlikely possible future technology - but will play no part in the transition to electric cars.
The advantage there is paint the whole car with photocells and park in the sunlight and that alone will go a long way to extend range.
That makes no sense. I can understand solar panels that charge while driving, but solar panels intended for use when parked, is illogical. Simply plug it in when parked.
So the future of electrics looks bright and the better they look like the less drive there will be for H2 stuff, fuel cells and all that.
The drive for H2 comes from two sources:
1. the fossil fuel / automotive industry trying to slow down the advent of electric.
2. Scammers trying to get funding for new technology ideas.