[noogle]

Batteries needed electric vehicles are still expensive and seem to essentially be the bottleneck for mass change to EV.

The infrastructure needed to support battery electric vehicles seem to be expensive/complex to run sufficiently well in practice. In the US Tesla's supercharger network is often cited as a moat against other manufacturers. It's not even building the chargers - it's maintenance and compatibility. Charger network are a losing operation, but they are critical for adoption. Tesla affords this via huge margins, but that won't work for the rest of the market outside of the luxury segment.

Could it be that the BEV market (in the US at least) lends itself to monopolization? If so, hydrogen can make sense as a technology that does not rely on losing charger network to operate (just like no car manufacturer needs to subsidize fuel stations).

[quonn]

The Tesla network in Europe is compatible with everything else. All vendors are using CCS2. I know it's different in the US, but even there it seems to be changing.

The main advantage Tesla currently has is the size of the network as well as the seamless integration into their navigation system and automatic payment without a custom card. However this could be easily done by competitors if they would grasp the importance of it.

[TheLoafOfBread]

I am also wondering why I am forced to use random applications instead of having contactless interface for a debit card.

[rnk]

Yes, batteries are in short supply. We have been increasing battery supplies, energy density, and reducing nickel and cobalt for a decade. Theres's basically endless demand today. I'm sorry but your comments are basically standard and inccurate fud against EVs.

Tesla already announced they were going to make their us charging network support the us ccs standard for charging. In Europe they have been rolling it out to all cars (that all use the same standard plug) for a few years. Tesla chargers in Europe that are already working for competitor cars are not ruinously expensive. The reason tesla got so much market share was their competitors are very threatened by the transition to a completely new drive train, making their billions of dollars in investments in design of ICE engines, but also the entirety of mufflers, alternators, emissions controls, spark plugs just worthless scrap over time. Of course they all wanted to keep doing something like an ice engine, Toyota wanted hydrogen, etc.

[bastawhiz]

Counterpoint: I can't even refill my damn inkjet without the manufacturer doing their damnedest to get me to pay multiples for what's essentially commodity ink. I have no faith that hydrogen won't work the same.

[noogle]

Yet those measures are being circumvented, because physically you can fill the cartridge, and legally, because this physical ability requires the manufacturer to take intrusive measures which are blocked by courts/legislators.

It's hard to force the consumer to not use their product. Conversely, it's hard to force the operator of a fast charger networks to do something. We can see other BEV manufacturer following Tesla's method (e.g. Rivian) setting up their own charger network. It's not a desirable future for such important market like transportation.

[chmod775]

There is little political will to regulate printer cartridges.

Cars on the other hand are heavily regulated.

[bastawhiz]

The oil industry, I can assure you, would be quick to lobby for little standardization and regulation on hydrogen exactly for the reason they they want it to be in the same sorry state as printer ink

[fomine3]

Don't you see even Tesla Supercharger is opening for all EVs? It won't work.