• Laborer3652@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    29 days ago

    So why not send hydrogen from a production location to (essentially) an electrical sub-station where it can generate power that can be used to charge electric vehicles. Why does a gas that burns invisibly need to be involved in transportation?

    • Hypx@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      28 days ago

      That’s just an indirect way of power a car via hydrogen. Sure, it can work. But it just implies that having cars directly powered by hydrogen are the better idea.

      • Laborer3652@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        27 days ago

        We already have electric infrastructure everywhere but not hydrogen infrastructure. It would be far cheaper and easier to use hydrogen as a method of bulk clean energy transportation than to directly power vehicles with them.

        Plus since there is less surface area from the vastly reduced amount of piping required, you can mitigate evaporative losses through the pipelines.

        Your proposal still doesn’t address my safety concern of having a gas that burns near invisibly in passenger and commercial vehicles.