The infrastructure needed to fully support hydrogen would take decades to develop. Starting with some way to efficiently manufacture hydrogen without using even more fossil fuels.
It's the stall that they wanted --- to give them more time to milk ICE and adapt.
There is no corresponding infrastructure delay for EVs which are already being adopted.
Toyota has actually pivoted and partnered with Mazada to share tech to fill watch other's gaps. Toyota is releasing a full electric car in about 12-15 months.
Yes --- they're now being forced to play catch-up after their ridiculous attempt at diversion went nowhere.
Here is what they were spouting less than 2 years ago.
“By promoting further collaboration in producing, transporting and using fuel in combination with internal combustion engines, the five companies aim to provide customers with greater choice”.
There are currently over 150000 public charging points available all across the USA. And there are no technological issues to prevent more from being installed. At some point, more capacity will be needed but again --- no technological issues to prevent this.
Last time I looked there were less than 60 hydrogen refueling stations --- "pilot" projects in California put in place with government funding.
I rest my case. Like it or not, the decision has already been made by the marketplace --- the future is electric.
You will need many millions of them, and enough generating capacity to power then all. That is many years away. Likely decades.
There's also no technological issue preventing the expansion of hydrogen stations. It's also worth noting that this directly replaces the gas station, both in number and location. This is not nearly as big of a challenge as you might think. Unlike charging stations, which must exist in much greater numbers and new locations.
There are about 300 million ICE cars in the US. BEVs are nowhere near ready to replace ICE cars.
What’s ironic is that BEV fans are just repeating the same anti-EV arguments used against BEVs. They’re not even aware that BEVs were at zero just a decade and a half ago. The fact is, FCEVs are needed by millions of people. As the world shifts to green energy, FCEVs will play a major role and likely one much bigger than what BEVs ever could’ve achieved. So the whole argument is just an act of shortsightedness.
That’s the same argument said about wind and solar not that long ago. People are repeating history by saying the same thing. In the end, you are making something with just wind, sunlight and water. Since they are practically infinite resources, the cost will trend towards zero.
The infrastructure needed to fully support hydrogen would take decades to develop. Starting with some way to efficiently manufacture hydrogen without using even more fossil fuels.
It's the stall that they wanted --- to give them more time to milk ICE and adapt.
There is no corresponding infrastructure delay for EVs which are already being adopted.