Exactly my point.A Lexus LFA will do less. Niche products.
One of the arguments in favour of ammonia is that it isn't actually all that different from LNG in handling terms, and most of the same safety precautions apply.In terms of which hazard I'd rather deal with, I'd rather deal with "wear an air pack around a crashed ammonia-fueled car" than "you need a thermal imager to see if the car is on fire"
It's generally a pain to manufacture and handle: in most cases batteries or some kind of biofuel are likely to be preferable.A passenger bus is probably the only place where hydrogen works.
Hydrolysing their water instead would certainly solve that right?Indigenous Communities Face Water Crisis Amid Lithium Mining Boom
https://globalwater.osu.edu/news/indigenous-communities-face-water-crisis-amid-lithium-mining-boom
View attachment 758541
Exactly.One of the arguments in favour of ammonia is that it isn't actually all that different from LNG in handling terms, and most of the same safety precautions apply.
Sorry, that graphic seems to be implying that hydrogen-fueled aircraft are a good idea.The 'hydrogen ladder' is quite a good way of visualising where it's an appropriate option, and city buses are very low on that ranking.
![]()
So where do you get the required carbon to add to the iron, then?One of the real niches is steel production. Most current steelmaking uses coal for its carbon content, not just for heat, so the CO2 emissions are locked in by the process design. The leading alternative for 'green' steelmaking uses hydrogen as a reducing agent instead.
But you now have a carbon and your fuel cells don't like that at all.What is needed is a methane fuel cell. The infrastructure is already in place and is well known to handle methane and you get 4 hydrogen atoms per molecule vs ammonia with only 3.
Featured ImageA passenger bus is probably the only place where hydrogen works.
1) relatively small load. 53 passengers as a city bus is all of 5500kg/12,000lbs "cargo" weight at full load, and a bus probably only travels at an average of 3/4 full.
2) large volume under the floor or on the roof available for hydrogen tankage.
SpecificationsWhat about the transportation of hydrogen?
Hydrolysing their water instead would certainly solve that right?
It's saying you use the hydrogen to make synthetic liquid fuels, because there's not really a credible alternative to hydrocarbons for long haul aircraft fuel. It's the same pathway they've identified for vintage cars.Sorry, that graphic seems to be implying that hydrogen-fueled aircraft are a good idea.
You still need some, but you don't need nearly as much since it's only being used as an alloying material rather than a reducing agent. It's the use as a reducing agent that creates most of the carbon dioxide emissions.So where do you get the required carbon to add to the iron, then?
How does the hydrogen get to each station, or do you need an electrolyser at every one? What happens in places that are less sunny?Specifications
The bus is powered by hydrogen and operates with a fuel cell and an electric battery, so its only waste is water and, like electric vehicles, it does not generate noise pollution. The low-emission hydrogen comes from a PEM technology electrolyzer with 165 kW of installed power that can produce 23 tons per year and is powered by a system of 2,000 1MW photovoltaic panels installed at the Green Móvil Logistics Center in Bogotá. Additionally, there is a backup alternative from the National Interconnected System (SIN) with REC certificates, guaranteeing that its origin is exclusively from renewable sources. The hydrogen station can charge the bus in less than 10 minutes and since the vehicle has a storage capacity of 30 kg of hydrogen, it has a range of more than 450 km with a single daily recharge, reaching a maximum speed of 90 km/h.
.
View attachment 758587
https://h2lac.org/noticias/colombia...-su-primer-bus-impulsado-por-hidrogeno-verde/
With this project, which to date has had an investment of more than 2.5 billion, Marcopolo Superpolo reaffirms its commitment to mobility, technological progress and innovation in the country. Additionally, the company expects to invest 1.5 billion dollars for the adaptation of the plant, thus confirming that this investment in infrastructure and technology represents a significant step towards the creation of a more sustainable and resilient transportation ecosystem in Colombia.
This commitment is also due to the latent tendency of the Colombian market to move sustainably, contributing to the environment, which is reflected in the significant growth in Colombia for acquiring vehicles with this technology. According to data provided by Andemos, the category of hybrid and electric vehicles in the country registered an increase of 13.1% in 2023 compared to the previous year, reaching a total of 31,500 vehicles sold, demonstrating a boom in the awareness of Colombians about the importance of environmental sustainability in the transportation sector.
It is estimated that, with the implementation of hydrogen-powered buses in Bogotá, a reduction of 1,083 tons of CO2 emissions per hydrogen bus (zero emissions) will be achieved for eight years. This is equivalent to planting 73,000 trees.
https://www.motorhublatam.com/marcopolo-presenta-buses-electricos-e-hidrogenoo/View attachment 758588
I do not know I would need to read about it, I will do it later and if I find something I let you know Regards.How does the hydrogen get to each station, or do you need an electrolyser at every one? What happens in places that are less sunny?
Ah, okay. Now that makes sense.It's saying you use the hydrogen to make synthetic liquid fuels, because there's not really a credible alternative to hydrocarbons for long haul aircraft fuel. It's the same pathway they've identified for vintage cars.
Nuclear powered hydrolysis.You still need some, but you don't need nearly as much since it's only being used as an alloying material rather than a reducing agent. It's the use as a reducing agent that creates most of the carbon dioxide emissions.
All of which assumes you can produce 'green' hydrogen on a large scale, of course.
nsky
Before Tesla, Suffragettes in rolling phone booths is what most people envisionedThe electric car actually dates back to much earlier.
https://www.caranddriver.com/features/g43480930/history-of-electric-cars/
The first car phone.Before Tesla, Suffragettes in rolling phone booths is what most people envisioned
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/07/donald-trump-tariffs-market-reaction-live/8:09AM
Minister insists electric car targets not being watered down over tariff threat
A minister denied the Government was weakening its net-zero policy after announcing a relaxation of the rules around fines for manufacturers who do not sell enough electric vehicles.
Sir Keir Starmer has rushed through changes to electric car rules as the motoring industry faces turmoil from Donald Trump’s tariffs.
It was put to roads minister Lilian Greenwood on Times Radio that the changes watered down the original target.
She replied: “We’re not watering it down. We said in our manifesto tat we would commit to ending the sale of new pure petrol and diesel cars from 2030 and that’s exactly what we’re announcing today.
“What we are doing is clarifying for industry how we get to the total position where there will be no non-zero emission vehicles from 2035.
“What we want to do is make these clean electric vehicles affordable for absolutely everyone, and that everyone can make the switch, and that’s why we’re investing billions of pounds in supporting the car industry, in rolling out chargepoints.”
That was always well known and why coal-fired power stations will be banned in the EU after 2027.
That plan may well be in doubt, though.That was always well known and why coal-fired power stations will be banned in the EU after 2027.
GM hires a Fred Armisen lookalike because another retirement aged engineer can turn around the EV division with a combination of dated electric car evangelism and condescension. The real problem is that GM has chronically underinvested in their moneymaking ICE car lines for an expensively over-engineered EV lineup. GM had an incredibly innovative battery form factor but it also was entirely inflexible for a market where hybrid and ICE sales are the immediate future. Stellantis will leverage the disastrous Charger Daytona and Wagoneer S launches with ICE powered variants in the coming year but GM is stuck with their BEVs. And sadly, even GM has to admit that their skateboard form factor is essentially dead for future products.That plan may well be in doubt, though.
In other news, via Slashdot (links to the MSN version of the story):
https://www.wsj.com/business/autos/...ning-evs-into-affordable-family-cars-836c565d
The manufacturer recalls for fire prone battery packs aren’t exercises in disinformation but outline the very real fire risks. If you own an electric car, you’re already paying much higher auto insurance premiums but expect higher homeowners premiums as well if you have an attached garage. I personally would charge a BEV or plug in hybrid in my own garage.It's frustrating that people keep believing the myths but I surprise it isn't surprising given those constantly putting out disinformation and misinformation:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-06...ormation-battery-ev-australia-study/105394232
They will save the planet, they are quieter, they will rebuild local industries, and they even come with attractive tax breaks. Re-wind a couple of years, and there were plenty of reasons for buying a shiny new Tesla or Polestar electric vehicle instead of an old-fashioned, high-pollution, petrol or diesel car.
And yet, one by one, all those arguments have been punctured. They won’t help the environment as much as we think, they are mostly made in China, the tax breaks are gone, and now we learn that they are more likely to break down as well.
If you were not already worried enough about where the heck you might be able to recharge your electric car during a long drive over the summer, now there is something else to fret about as well.
You are more likely to break down than the other cars on the road. According to a poll of 30,000 drivers by WhatCar, EV’s suffer from a higher breakdown rate than petrol, diesel or hybrid vehicles, with 16.8 per cent of owners reporting some kind of fault, compared to 15.4 per cent for diesel, the second worst offender.
It gets worse. The faults on EV’s were less likely to be something that could be fixed on the side of the road by an emergency repair service, meaning that motorists were less likely to be able to complete their journey, and might have to pay for an expensive towing service as well.
And of course, if something does go wrong it will probably cost more to fix, with surveys suggesting that EVs cost 30 per cent to 50 per cent more to repair than petrol cars, while replacing the tyres if you get a puncture will be pricey as well, with each one, according to one survey, costing £77 more on average than traditional vehicles.
Perhaps not very surprising, the insurance is more expensive, given that the costs are higher if anything goes wrong, and that has to be recouped somehow or other. The costs start to add up very quickly. An EV is turning into a very expensive choice.
That is not what we were promised. One of the strong selling points for EVs over conventional vehicles was that because they had so few moving parts compared to internal combustion engines, they were far less likely to go wrong.
And overall, they were meant to be far cheaper to run than the vehicles they were replacing. One by one, all the arguments for owning an EV have been falling apart. It turns out that they cost more to run. The tax breaks are gradually being withdrawn; as of this year, they are no longer exempt from road tax, and from Christmas they will have to start paying the congestion charge in London, and probably very soon in other major cities as well.
On top of all that, they are handing the auto industry to China, destroying one of Europe’s major industries, and given the environmental impact of the manufacturing process, and all the minerals that go into them, they might not even be better for the environment either.
In reality, the drive to force us all to switch to EVs was top-down. I was state-planning at its very worst. It set arbitrary targets, lavished subsidies and tax breaks on an industry, only to withdraw them when they became too expensive. Perhaps worst of all, it backed an unproven technology that may well turn out to be an expensive flop. The wheels are coming off the EV dream – and once drivers are convinced that they are not the right choice, it will be very hard to persuade them to start buying EVs again.