How amazing is this?

[TimberWolf]

I'm no hydrogen lover. But does it matter whether it is a primary energy source? Petrol also needs a shed-load of processing in refining. And it is running out. And it pollutes. Is that preferable?

I agree with you, petrol has a number of problems. The first being that it is such a good energy-dense and easily handled fuel, so less mature technologies have a lot to live up to. Second it comes out of the ground almost for free, but it will run out. Third the infernal combustion that burns it is carp (~75% of the petrol is wasted as heat). Fourth carbon, yada, yada (this last one is a biggie for some, but I'm not fussed). Make your own list here, suffice to say I agree with you.

But it is totally beside my point, because I don't care what energy sources are used. I don't particularly care about hydrogen, except that it is a step up from a hundred or so heavy batteries. I am merely supporting the principle of electrically-powered cars. Nothing delusional there - electricity is a transferable energy. If hydrogen is no good, I leave it up to "experts" to come up with something better.What, because I thought PCs might have a part to play in business? I used that example to demonstrate that so-called experts can be spectacularly wrong.The hydrogen used today - where does that come from?

The pure stuff is obtained by electrolysis (quite inefficiently) and the less pure stuff from fossil fuels (e.g. coal gas).

But if people buy them and use them, what's the problem? If that happened it sounds like success to me.

Hydrogen has a number of problems (even though it has excellent energy density by weight. I've covered a lot of them before. E.g. it needs to be kept at 20 degrees above absolute zero and is explosive, it is inefficient to convert to hydrogen and then to electricity (11% in some cases, depending on the source). My main gripe though is that people assume hydrogen is some kind of energy source. I know you are not one of these. Also, in all probability the hydrogen will be derived from fossil fuels (a better carrier will almost certainly be developed before we build the required nukes). Hydrogen would in that case be a wasteful, expensive, dangerous and inefficient energy carrier.

I never said hydrogen was simple, or a mature technology. Until we perfect the windmill generator on the roof or magic carpets, we might have to put up with less than perfect technologies.

I think electric batteries are our best bet currently, though changing our driving habits could make a big difference too (e.g. using a 10+ kg devices to transport us rather than a 1000+ kg vehicles).