que all the people saying the traditional OEM competition was going to be way better at manufacturing the vehicles while also not understanding anything about battery manufacturing being the bottle neck and the most expensive component for EVs.

LG energy packs are not able to keep up with demand because the big three mostly put all their eggs in the LG energy basket and its now becoming a problem.

manufacturing EVs is easier, less parts and especially moving parts. The main issue is battery cell/pack supply is going to be constrained well into 2027. Ford has a new battery facility they are opening up 2025 with SK innovations instead of LG energy ,both of which were involved in a lawsuit claiming SK stole LG energy designs and were banned from selling packs in their GA production facility to VW and Ford.

more likely sea walls will be built and capital intensive pump stations will be utilized in last ditch efforts to save major metro areas along the coast and tributaries.

we are talking most large populous cities in the US as they are mostly costal, The less populated cities will just be abandoned as it won't be worth saving causing immigration into other areas further exacerbating living situations on cities or communities not prepared for large influx of people moving inland or to sea-walled city outskirts were climate refuge camps will most likely be erected.

VW really messed up their software in the iD launch, its still bad even a year later.

VW is also the same company that had to be forced to build out their charging infrastructure as a result of Diesel gate where they found them cheating emissions testing via software, imagine that good enough to cheat emissions with software but bad at actually making a decent UX infotainment software.

If you look a little closer into how 95% of hydrogen is made you will find that is just liquid natural gas in disguise. The only people who use electrolysis at an industrial scale is using it for making "green steel" where they need high heat energy source to smelt steel in a "green" way.

seriously everyone thinks electrolysis is the main way hydrogen is made and its so far from the truth currently that it really isn't even worth treating it seriously until lots of breakthroughs happen and it looks like photobioreactors will outpace direct electrolysis as a larger percentage of hydrogen production because it will likely scale better using sunlight to drive off gassing hydrogen.

trains work as the infrastructure to charge their cells is more localized.

I don't care about how the German gov't thinks they are smarter, Its pretty obvious they were short sighted in energy generation by going with Russian LNG pipelines and not expecting them to fuck that up. So if that is your standard of smart hydrogen use cases I doubt I will be able to convince you and will just stop trying.

Rockets and Airplanes are the strongest argument for hydrogen due to high impulse energy needed and the fact of losing its weight as it burns the liquid. And to be frank even rockets have higher impulse energy fuels per weight than hydrogen (RP-1 is just nasty stuff to handle), hydrogen is just cleaner to burn.

any industrial scale algae photobioreactors in working order outside of a lab? sure it might work but at what scale would be needed to run a nations energy grid or consumer car infrastructure?

Less messy and limited than hydrogen without the handwaving of electrolysis which isn't how 95% of hydrogen is produced. Hydrogen has its place, but not for cars IMO I think its a foolcell where people like to pretend its green but never look into how hydrogen is actually produced to be consumed. If you really look into it, hydrogen used for making "green steel" is often the only place you find electrolysis used at an industrial scale to get the "green" title, everywhere else just uses oil refining byproduct hydrogen when they crack liquid natural gas by the steam forming processes.

At the end of the day, mining for energy and resources still happens with consumer vehicles hydrogen or otherwise and to try and say its more messy to build EVs than hydrogen fuel cells is missing the important fact that hydrogen production is an extra step over just using LNG turbines to generate energy. They then move the goal post saying "well we can use it for energy generation and hybrids/BEVs to transport" and sure it will work but then again why not just use LNG instead of cracking it for hydrogen?

We would also still need to mine materials to build hydrogen cars, so just because it doesn't use rare earths which are already trying to be squeezed out of the battery cell supply chain due to cost? what/how exactly does hydrogen fuel cells benefit from less resource intensive mining or less limited? I feel like hydrogen is more limited due to not being a significant part of our infrastructure and how capital intensive it would be to add it in beyond just renewable energy generation excess storage of which there are plenty of other methods of less complexity.

sounds like more than just a little bias from that guy, hydrogen for drivers is very stupid if someone wanted to find a mid ground hybrids are far more effective use of resources than trying to shoe-horn it into ground transportation. For rockets and airplanes i can see a use case, but not for most other transportation.

More importantly why not just use LNG instead of steam forming it to produce the hydrogen, because surely this guy understands that 95% of industrial hydrogen is cracking hydrocarbons and not electrolysis. The article states nothing about hydrogen generation, they all just assume the public will think electrolysis when its far and away the real cost of producing hydrogen at a large industrial scale needed.

nothing like driving around crazy people crashing into things with odorless energy sources 10x more flammable than gasoline.

ownership of a BEV after 1.5 years of ownership is less damaging as a manufacturing and energy use case compared to ICE. Studies have been done on this yet people will still bring up "but mining is bad!" yea we know we just want to do it for resources that won't continue to be worse while we figure out recycling of batteries which can be profitable for their rare earth metals like nickel and cobalt.

Hydrogen was a non-starter simply on the infrastructure side, both generating it (little known fact that 95% of hydrogen is made by steam forming liquid natural gas a byproduct of the hydrocarbon refining cycle) and shipping/storage are not very useful unless you are talking about using it for flight both rockets/airplanes need high impulse energy along with high weight restraints that make batteries not a good energy source.

​

>Supplying all the stuff that goes into them isn't great for the environment.

Neither is Hydrogen in its current state, so what's your point? some far off future where we can store liquid hydrogen at room temperatures in some un-obtainium vessel when we have working fusion reactors?

> AMLO has been one of the most useless presidents in world history.

He did successfully lobby the US not to label the cartels what they are Narco Terrorist. So he wasn't that useless to the cartels that run a large portion of the country. Can't forget that feather in his cap.

Not to lawyers, sometimes accidents liabilities due to faulty equipment is less Than the cost of recalls so they just let shit hit the fan and pay off families.

this has lead to more than a few deaths of known issues that could have been recalled and fixed.