Remix.run Logo
aunty_helen 2 hours ago

Kinda glad this is the case. When people go out of their way to avoid common sense they should be punished.

Hydrogen is such a terrible idea it was never getting off the ground. There seems to be some kind of psychosis around it being the next oil and therefore greedy people want to get in early on. But this blinds them to the basic chemistry and physics.

dehrmann 38 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

> Hydrogen is such a terrible idea it was never getting off the ground.

It's coming from Toyota because Toyota can't wrap its head around not making engines. Ironically, the place hydrogen might work is airplanes where the energy density of batteries doesn't work.

nandomrumber 11 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Has the hydrogen storage problem been solved yet?

Last time I checked it needs to be stored in cryo / pressure vessel and it also leaks through steel and ruins its structural properties in the process.

dogma1138 2 minutes ago | parent [-]

There are some innovation like hydrogen paste but it’s not going to be useful for a combustion engine cycle.

breve 31 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> It's coming from Toyota because Toyota can't wrap its head around not making engines.

Of course they can. Toyota sells BEVs. As time goes on BEVs will become a greater percentage of their sales.

dehrmann 25 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

The bZ4X? 10+ years after the Nissan Leaf?

breve 15 minutes ago | parent [-]

And the bZ3, bZ5, bZ7, bZ3X, the Lexus RZ, and soon the Hilux EV:

https://electrek.co/2026/01/09/toyota-electric-pickup-images...

formerly_proven 26 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Toyota sells bad EVs and was the last OEM to offer one. It’s the most anti-EV OEM by far and engages/engaged in the most EV FUD.

Spooky23 5 minutes ago | parent [-]

[delayed]

qingcharles 16 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The energy density doesn't work for now. Everybody hoping for that breakthrough, and battery aircraft are moving into certain sectors (drone delivery, air taxis etc).

aunty_helen 7 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

One of the trade offs is that engines are actually ridiculously heavy. Compact, extreme high power electric motors are starting to be commercialised. But also, fuel burns so you lose weight as you’re flying whereas batteries stay the same.

Electric aviation is interesting but as someone who knows a bit about the industry, biofuels make more sense here.

Lerc 5 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Structural batteries were supposed to be the solution where the density wasn't so important. I don't really have a good understanding of the ration of fuel weight to structural weight in existing aircraft though.

satvikpendem 29 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

What does this mean? They have electric vehicles too.

foota 8 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Hydrogen is such a terrible idea it was never getting off the ground.

See: the Hindenburg disaster

afternote: There's the potential for an amazing pun in here, but I don't think I quite did the opportunity justice.

marcosdumay an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> There seems to be some kind of psychosis around it being the next oil

There's a very well financed propaganda campaign.

pjc50 an hour ago | parent [-]

Yes, it's not the new oil, it's the same oil in "green" packaging. Plus some comforting lies about carbon capture.

nandomrumber 33 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There is a great way to store, transport, and use hydrogen:

Bind it to various length carbon chains.

When burned as an energy source the two main by products are carbon dioxide which is a plant growth nutrient, and water which is also essential to plant growth.

Environmentalists will love it!

And they can prise my turbo diesels engines from my cold dead hands.

ForHackernews an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Why is it such a terrible idea? In theory you can generate it via electrolysis in places with plentiful renewable energy, and then you've got a very high-density, lightweight fuel. On the surface, it seems ideal for things like cars or planes where vehicle weight matters. Batteries are huge and heavy and nowhere near as energy dense as gasoline.

ssl-3 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Ignoring some of the other issues:

Imagine we have this electrolysis plant, splitting up water to produce the hydrogen we need for an area. That's fine.

But it needs fed electricity to keep the process going. Lots of it. It needs more electrical power to split the water than combining it again produces.

So it starts off being energy-negative, and it takes serious electricity to make it happen. Our grid isn't necessarily ready for that.

And then we need to transport the hydrogen. Probably with things like trucks and trains at first (but maybe pipelines eventually). This makes it even more energy-negative, and adds having great volumes of this potentially-explosive gas in our immediate vicinity some of the time whether we're using it individually or not.

Or: We can just plug in our battery-cars at home, and skip all that fuel transportation business altogether.

It's still energy-negative, and the grid might not be ready for everyone to do that either.

But at least we don't need to to implement an entirely new kind of scale for hydrogen production and distribution before it can be used.

So that's kind of the way we've been going: We plug out cars into the existing grid and charge them using the same electricity that could instead have been used to produce hydrogen.

(It'd be nice if battery recycling were more common, but it turns out that they have far longer useful lives than anyone reasonably anticipated and it just isn't a huge problem...yet. And that's not a huge concern, really: We already have a profitable and profoundly vast automotive recycling industry. We'll be sourcing lithium from automotive salvage yards as soon as it is profitable to do so.)

stephen_g an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It’s horrible to work with - dangerous, embrittlement issues etc., and very energy intensive to compress into very heavy cryogenic storage containers…

credit_guy an hour ago | parent [-]

> dangerous

It is actually less dangerous than other fuels, for the simple reason that it is extremely light and buoyant. A gasoline fire is bad, because the gasoline stays where it is until it fully burns. A hydrogen fire is less bad, because it will tend to move upwards.

chongli 27 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

That's assuming the hydrogen is just loose in the area, like it'd been released from a balloon in a chemistry classroom. That amount of hydrogen is extremely small, from an energy standpoint. Equivalent to a teaspoon of gasoline or so.

If you assume a realistic fuel capacity for a hydrogen vehicle, the hydrogen tank will be both much larger than a gas tank and the hydrogen will be under extreme pressure. A tank like that in your car would be extremely dangerous even if it were filled only with inert gas.

jiggawatts 31 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Hydrogen mixed with air has a very wide range of concentrations where it is explosive. It accumulates inside containers or just the roof of the car… where the passengers are. It takes just one lit cigarette for it to go boom.

jcgrillo 21 minutes ago | parent [-]

And it burns really hot

loeg an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's hell to store. The energy density is terrible and as a tiny molecule it escapes most seals. When it transitions from a liquid to a gas, it expands manyfold (i.e., explodes).

L-four an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The cheapest way to make hydrogen is to use fossil fuels.

Rygian an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Check out the "Clean Hydrogen Ladder" document.

Hydrogen wastes a large amount of energy.

cbmuser an hour ago | parent [-]

Unless you produce it using the Sulfur-Iodine cycle in a high-temperature nuclear reactor.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur%E2%80%93iodine_cycle

and: https://www.jaea.go.jp/04/o-arai/nhc/en/research/hydrogen_he...

CamperBob2 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Besides being expensive to generate unless you already happen to have an electrolysis plant handy, hydrogen is awkward and hazardous to store. Once generated, it costs yet more energy to liquefy, and then it seeps right through many common metals, weakening them in the process. It's just not a good consumer-level energy source, and nobody could figure out why Toyota couldn't see that.

Interestingly, liquid hydrogen is nowhere near the most energy-dense way to store and transport it. I don't recall the exact numbers but absorption in a rare-earth metal matrix is said to be much better on a volumetric basis. [1] Still not exactly cheap or convenient, but it mitigates at least some of the drawbacks with liquid H2.

1: https://www.fuelcellstore.com/blog-section/what-hydrogen-sto...

smcin an hour ago | parent [-]

Remember that China briefly embargoed Japan for rare earth metals in 2010, and Toyota launched the Mirai in 2014. My theory was that it was developed as a national fallback for Japan in case that embargo continued or got worse. Think 1930s Volkswagen. Anyone can comment on that?

seanmcdirmid 21 minutes ago | parent [-]

Japan went heavy into hydrogen for a couple of decades ago. The only reason we are even talking about hydrogen passenger vehicles now is because Japan thought it was the future, they made a mistake.

SideburnsOfDoom an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Hydrogen is the minimum viable atom: one proton, one electron. H2 is a tiny molecule. "hydrogen embrittlement" is when it's small enough to diffuse into solid metal, because it's that much smaller than iron atoms.

It's hard to work with, and what's the point? For most uses, electricity supply is everywhere.