Don't have to be a true believer to recognize bias. Hydrogen-power is so far from a product you or I can buy that its laughable to fret over industry simps, and yet ...
... this article didn't mesh with what I thought I saw over the last year, so I looked into why. Factual accuracy wasn't on its side. Being unable to avoid reporting on certain negative facts doesn't entitle them to make others up in denial of all evidence to the contrary.
"Everywhere" was too much a non-credible stretch for even hyperbole; THAT is a fact.
I believe Michael Barnard is a con man who some how gets paid to hate on hydrogen. Most of his "analysis" is just linking to previous articles he's written
Companies loved the idea of hydrogen because it was still a 'fuel' they could sell to the consumer as opposed to solar which wouldnt require filling stations.
Oil companies in particular loved hydrogen because it was so easy to watch it fail while continuing to sell fossil fuel burning infrastructure as "hydrogen ready"
First, produce hydrogen with solar and wind, then store and transport it with rail and ships, and then it can be distributed to smaller vehicles. The biggest issue are oil and gas industry and politicians doing anything they can to stop the hydrogen progress.
In the "smaller vehicles" part, great obstacles need to be overcome.
I would be content with doing only the parts that are reasonably economical and efficient:
produce it, store it as a compressed gas
if CO2 is available, convert it to methane (can be liquefied for distribution) or even bigger molecules
if there is demand, use it to reduce steel
if storage maxed (no CO2, no ore to reduce) burn it back to water in a turbine, selling electrical power when the market needs it
Economically, this would likely make ends meet - and keep hydrogen away from consumers (consumers are careless and their systems often faulty, while hydrogen is demanding and dangerous).
Yeah. Adoption means nothing as one is making hydrogen with the mindset they make petroleum based fuel.
Production needs to come before adoption. And by that, I mean, the end goal production process.
Any adoption before that is just wasting more energy.
But that's the same for batteries, from what I see.
Sorry friend, hydrogen cannot be stored or transported in any kind of practical or reliable fashion.
Some ege case where a hydrogen-powered vehicle was produced doesn't take away from my point. It is not, and it cannot ever be a practical fuel source, because it effectively cannot be stored.
Bro, if you do not understand the very basics of the standard model or solid state chemistry, you should probably just stop talking and being so arrogant.
Anybody that has the slightest clue about hydrogen knows that it cannot be used because it cannot be stored effectively. This is not an opinion, this is very fundamental basic, primitive almost, chemistry.
I can make a fucking hydrogen car in my kitchen right now by producing hydrogen via electrolysis, and direct it through a jet nozzle to produce thrust, but that is in no way proving that it's usable in a practical sense, which is the word you seem to be skipping over in my replies.
Nobody has been able to solve this problem, and there's no sign of it being solved on the horizon. Hydrogen is too small of an atom to be contained by anything else without destroying it.
This "article" is bullshit. A simple search will show that the EU is and has been using fuel cells in their trucks for some time now. Not only does it work, but real world tests show it breaking exceptions.
26 Comments
MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de · 31 pts · 269d
Cleantechnica exists for the sole purpose of selling Tesla products. Links to it have no place in this or any credible community.
https://www.respectmyplanet.org/publications/fuel-cells/cleantechnica-painted-into-corner-with-years-of-anti-hydrogen-bias
rimu@piefed.social · 4 pts · 269d
I dunno about that. A quick browse of the site found several very negative recent Tesla stories
https://cleantechnica.com/2025/12/17/california-tesla-has-engaged-in-false-advertising-has-to-suspend-vehicle-production-sales-if-problem-not-fixed/
https://cleantechnica.com/2025/12/14/teslas-8-year-model-sales-trends-in-11-european-countries/
https://cleantechnica.com/2025/12/12/us-tesla-sales-drop-23-in-november-year-over-year/
stabby_cicada@slrpnk.net · 3 pts · 269d
"Hydrogen economy" believers.
Factual accuracy.
Pick one.
MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de · 3 pts · 268d
Don't have to be a true believer to recognize bias. Hydrogen-power is so far from a product you or I can buy that its laughable to fret over industry simps, and yet ...
... this article didn't mesh with what I thought I saw over the last year, so I looked into why. Factual accuracy wasn't on its side. Being unable to avoid reporting on certain negative facts doesn't entitle them to make others up in denial of all evidence to the contrary.
"Everywhere" was too much a non-credible stretch for even hyperbole; THAT is a fact.
Geobloke@aussie.zone · 4 pts · 269d
I believe Michael Barnard is a con man who some how gets paid to hate on hydrogen. Most of his "analysis" is just linking to previous articles he's written
LordCrom@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 268d
Companies loved the idea of hydrogen because it was still a 'fuel' they could sell to the consumer as opposed to solar which wouldnt require filling stations.
We should have neen looking at aolar all along
BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 268d
Wish granted.
https://aptera.us/
SpatchyIsOnline@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 268d
Oil companies in particular loved hydrogen because it was so easy to watch it fail while continuing to sell fossil fuel burning infrastructure as "hydrogen ready"
heyWhatsay@slrpnk.net · 5 pts · 268d
First, produce hydrogen with solar and wind, then store and transport it with rail and ships, and then it can be distributed to smaller vehicles. The biggest issue are oil and gas industry and politicians doing anything they can to stop the hydrogen progress.
Jiggle_Physics@piefed.zip · 4 pts · 268d
Yes, using hydrogen cells as one part of the storage for over production of electricity from renewables would be the way to go, if you go hydrogen.
perestroika@slrpnk.net · 3 pts · 268d
In the "smaller vehicles" part, great obstacles need to be overcome.
I would be content with doing only the parts that are reasonably economical and efficient:
Economically, this would likely make ends meet - and keep hydrogen away from consumers (consumers are careless and their systems often faulty, while hydrogen is demanding and dangerous).
heyWhatsay@slrpnk.net · 2 pts · 267d
I agree, that's a reasonable plan.
ulterno@programming.dev · 1 pts · 268d
Yeah. Adoption means nothing as one is making hydrogen with the mindset they make petroleum based fuel.
Production needs to come before adoption. And by that, I mean, the end goal production process.
Any adoption before that is just wasting more energy.
But that's the same for batteries, from what I see.
Armillarian@pawb.social · 1 pts · 267d
Hydrogen in gas form regularly escape atmosphere and there's no long term study about what will happen if we mass produce it
Hydrogen gas cannot be safely stored, the container will get metal fatigue unless reforged regularly
Hydrogen gas is so small that it can pass through almost everything
Edit: add double new line to prevent someone from trying to derail the subject
AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 265d
Did your periods (.) also escape along with the hydrogen?
realitaetsverlust@piefed.zip · 4 pts · 269d
Well its hard to beat fossil fuel in terms of energy density.
phutatorius@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 267d
And if there were no externalities, that'd be just fine. But we're far from that wonderful state.
Krudler@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 269d
Hydrogen can never be used as a practical fuel source as it destroys anything it's put inside.
silence7@slrpnk.net · 2 pts · 269d
There are in fact hydrogen cars like the Mirai. Its a cost-effectiveness problem, not a you-can't do that problem.
Krudler@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 269d
Sorry friend, hydrogen cannot be stored or transported in any kind of practical or reliable fashion.
Some ege case where a hydrogen-powered vehicle was produced doesn't take away from my point. It is not, and it cannot ever be a practical fuel source, because it effectively cannot be stored.
macaw_dean_settle@lemmy.world · -9 pts · 268d
You are so confidential incorrect that I weep for the future. Please tell me you don't vote?
Krudler@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 268d
Bro, if you do not understand the very basics of the standard model or solid state chemistry, you should probably just stop talking and being so arrogant.
Anybody that has the slightest clue about hydrogen knows that it cannot be used because it cannot be stored effectively. This is not an opinion, this is very fundamental basic, primitive almost, chemistry.
I can make a fucking hydrogen car in my kitchen right now by producing hydrogen via electrolysis, and direct it through a jet nozzle to produce thrust, but that is in no way proving that it's usable in a practical sense, which is the word you seem to be skipping over in my replies.
Nobody has been able to solve this problem, and there's no sign of it being solved on the horizon. Hydrogen is too small of an atom to be contained by anything else without destroying it.
phoenixz@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 268d
Uh huh, as expected and predicted
macaw_dean_settle@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 268d
This "article" is bullshit. A simple search will show that the EU is and has been using fuel cells in their trucks for some time now. Not only does it work, but real world tests show it breaking exceptions.
chaosCruiser@futurology.today · 2 pts · 269d
Rhetoric contrast in the title. We’re off to a promising start with this one.
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 269d
@Hypx@piefed.social