this post was submitted on 29 Nov 2023
204 points (99.0% liked)
Technology
59468 readers
3212 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So it's the same if you have to build 5 times as many solar panels to do the same thing? It's just not.
Now we're in the "pro-BEV bullshit" zone. Batteries won't magically solve all transportation needs, nor solve the energy storage requirements of the grid. Alternatives still have to exist anyways, and the total lifecycle efficiency of BEVs isn't that special. In a lot of cases, avoiding excessive use of batteries will save you energy. So pursuing alternatives will not need radically more solar panels.
Where did I say batteries were perfect?
If you can admit that, you can admit there can be superior options to BEVs.
Admit what? That they aren't perfect? Yeah sure, nothing is. But where is the better option?
E-fuels or hydrogen made from green energy. With the latter you won't even give up on the future being EVs. They are the actually sustainable forms of transportation that everyone can accept.
... But they are way more inefficient then batteries, which is what I've been saying all this time.
Which doesn’t matter, something I’ve been saying all this time.
And the efficiency of batteries has been massively exaggerated too.
energy prices are far from stable and efficiency plays a huge role in the feasibility of a technology.
The efficiency of e fuels is far below hydrogen and hydrogen is still a lot worse than battery.
The advantages of a chemical fuel is that you make them when costs are very low and save them for when you need them. Even months later if need be. Not doable with batteries. Even the ICCT is admitting that electricity used to make hydrogen is going to much cheaper than electricity used to charge BEVs. It will likely be cheaper to operate a hydrogen car due to that fact.
At least with e-fuels, there's an argument to be made that there are too many unnecessary steps and that costs will be high. But with hydrogen, that argument doesn't really hold water. Fuel cell cars are also EVs. The gap between BEVs FCEVs on efficiency is small and shrinking. When the full lifecycle factors are included, it is likely the FCEV is the more efficient idea even now.
Hm, maybe, but using it in a vehicle doesn't sound too enticing. Although everything we talk about here is developing technologies, maybe the next breakthrough might change everything.