• Hypx@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    That’s revisionist history. Wind and solar were widely condemned as being inferior technology in the past. They are in many ways worse than hydropower, their main zero emission competitor of the time.

    Your repeating some old anti-hydrogen story probably from either an oil company or a battery company. An FCEV gets around 70 MPGe. There is very little argument that it is somehow less green than existing petrol cars. It’s an obvious repeat of classic anti-green rhetoric. We heard everything from solar panels or hybrids being demonized as being worse than the conventional solution by random fossil fuel marketing firms. It’s all bunk.

    And no to that last claim either. There’s a good reason to believe that an FCEV is greener than a BEV. For starters, it has much less upfront emissions during production. And at something like 30% green hydrogen, the BEV will never catch up to the FCEV, even if it is running on 100% green electricity.

    • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Solar electric was worse than hydro, or just about anything else, and more expensive per watt, as well. Decades went by, the cells got more efficient and cheaper production techniques, and suddenly they were a competitive option. None of that changes that they were, initially, a very bad choice, and only made sense if money wasn’t a factor for the person installing it.

      The same goes for hydrogen. Maybe it will be big in the future, but as it stands now it isn’t an option for many people.