Hiringa, with partners fuel supplier Waitomo Group and Australasia’s largest heavy vehicle fleet owner TR Group, on Tuesday opened three green hydrogen stations, with a fourth under way, within the North Island’s economic “golden triangle” of freight movement.

    • Rangelus@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      7 months ago

      There are problems with these articles, and it almost always comes down to scale. There currently isn’t the scale and infrastructure to bring the cost of hydrogen to make it cost effective compared to pure electric. With time that could change if there is a will to do so.

      But regardless, as I mentioned in my other comment, hydrogen has a much better use case in large scale transport. Trains and ships, for example, where volume isn’t a problem and where the weight of batteries becomes untenable. This is, I think, where hydrogen will be viable.

      • Viper_NZ@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        It’ll never be cost effective compared to pure electric. It’s simply far less efficient so the energy costs will remain higher.

        • Rangelus@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          That’s not entirely true. If you are purely looking at $/kWh then yes, of course this is the case. However that is not the only consideration when it comes to transport. Weight of the drive unit, use of rare earth metals, lifespan of the drive unit, energy density by weight, speed of recharge, ease of transport energy, and more are all considerations.

          I’m not arguing that vehicles will become hydrogen electric. I agree they are not suitable without some serious technological advances. What I’m saying is that at a certain point, larger vehicles (trucks, trains, ships, even aeroplanes) will become more suitable to hydrogen.

          • Viper_NZ@lemmy.nz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            Hydrogen has its own problems with rare metals like platinum and palladium.

            Even setting aside the energy loss, the cost of compression, chilling, storage etc is much more expensive than both fossil and ev charging infrastructure. Scale will help but it’s simply not there.

            I can see a future in aviation for fuel cells but for shipping I think it far more likely we’ll see something like ammonia fuel cells taking centre stage. It’s vastly more easy to transport and a leak at sea isn’t as big a deal.

            Light passenger vehicles? Never going to happen. It arrived 20 years too late.

            • Rangelus@lemmy.nz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              Ammonia is significantly more harmful in the event of a leak. Yes, it’s more hydrogen dense than pure liquid hydrogen.

              Ultimately I don’t see a reason to dismiss hydrogen like some are doing. Is it the perfect solution in all cases? Of course not. Does that mean it is not a viable fuel source for transport? Absolutely not.

              Scale solves most problems. Hydrogen also has other uses, such as steel production, which further increases the scale.

              For light vehicles batter EV is likely to be the leading type for some time, as volume is more of an issue then weight for the ranges we need.

              • Viper_NZ@lemmy.nz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                7 months ago

                It’s why I don’t see ammonia being used outside of shipping.

                Scale won’t get to fix FCEV light vehicle transport because is simply chicken and egg.

                Unless governments pump billions into hydrogen infrastructure there’s simply no financial return for any investors. And why should governments do that when BEVs are already solving the decarbonisation issue?

                Battery technologies like Lithium Iron Phosphate and Sodium Ion are here and solve the material issues. And once the materials are mined they enter a circular economy.

                Fast forward 30 years and most new car batteries will be made from old ones.

                • Rangelus@lemmy.nz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Look again. I’m not talking about light vehicles.

                  A BEV truck can weigh up to 5 tons more than a FCEV. Why would that not be a case use for hydrogen? Now scale up to a ship where volume is no issue. BEV shipping is a non-starter.

                  New battery tech is fantastic. But why would you assume new battery tech, currently prohibitively expensive, will come down with scale but hydrogen won’t?

                  • Viper_NZ@lemmy.nz
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    7 months ago

                    The short version is: Because people are making and buying the batteries. Hydrogen has failed to scale.

                    They’ve been ripping hydrogen stations out in the UK, Norway, California. Hydrogen may as well be Betamax or HD-DVD at this point.

                    Edit: I’ll be quite happy if I’m wrong. I would love to see more widespread decarbonisation assuming the hydrogen wasn’t blue.

        • Rangelus@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          I can’t find the exact figures, as it depends on battery range and battery tech. One study I’ve seen found a battery truck would weigh over 5000kg more than a hydrogen-electric version.

          I’ve also seen figures of double the weight for a Li-Ion battery EV compared to HEV at ranges above 300 miles.