• Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          “Well, we’ve proven to ourselves that we’re incapable of investing without it being a sunk cost that we are too petty to let go and will fight tooth and nail to make profitable… So let’s just skip investing in much of anything new ever because we’re nincompoops. If there’s no guaranteed profit, why invest?”

    • tsonfeir@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Japan has no lithium to mine. So hydrogen is the best option for them. While I understand this for Japan, there’s a big world out there where Toyota is a market leader… for now.

      • You999@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        9 months ago

        You are also missing the fact the Japan’s power grid is in a desperate need of repairs and improvements. Hydrogen won’t fix however it introduces some lower cost temporary fixes that can be quickly implemented. In the long term the correct solution would be to fix the grid but we both know if there’s a cheaper and easier solution what they’ll go with…

      • vrighter
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        but there is no hydrogen to mine either. Hydrogen is made from fossil fuels too (most of it)

        • tsonfeir@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Yes, steam methane reforming is the most cost effective. But there are other ways to make it. The most eco friendly was is electrolysis that uses electricity to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. There are some microorganisms, such as algae and bacteria, that can produce hydrogen through biological reactions—but those aren’t able to scale today.

        • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          9 months ago

          Important thing is there are multiple ways to produce hydrogen. Cheapest is through methane, but that’s only because methane itself is cheap. There are other methods of producing hydrogen and the more demand there is for it, the cheaper it’ll get. Especially when you consider there won’t OPEC to mess around with prices by rigging production against demand. So it would be smart to focus on fuel source which can be easily produced anywhere and can provide similar performance like current ICEs.

          • vrighter
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            yeah, but we urgently need that huge amount of renewable energy elsewhere.

      • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        Lithium to my knowledge is not as abundant and very hard to recycle. There are a lot of chemical waste in all processes.

        • Tja@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          9 months ago

          It wasn’t very abundant 10 years ago. More deposits have been found, refining and extracting technology has improved and hopefully we will see the first commercial mass produced sodium-based battery this year (not in 25 years like fusion).

          Lithium nickel cobalt batteries are still the best for density per kg, but will be reserved for premium cars in the future.

      • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        9 months ago

        Yes, biggest car manufacturer, which also manufacturer of the most popular hybrid car in the world, doesn’t know what they are doing when they are making cars. Right. I’ll take your word for it.

        • stoly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          You want me to ignore my own experience and all of the bad business decisions we’ve observed companies make throughout history because you want to be oppositional and edgy.

          Also doesn’t help that you don’t know what a fallacy is. I recommend you have a look at Wikipedia.

        • 2xar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          Nokia was way more dominant in the phone market than Toyota in the automotive industry. Yet, when it was time to jump on the new technology that everyone else was jumping on (android), they fell into the sunk cost fallacy and stood by their own, outdated tech (symbian). That promptly got them bankrupt. Toyota may still change its course, but if they wait too long, they are going to end up just like Nokia did.

          • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            That’s a far better comparison than other offered. Nokia failed not because Symbian was outdated, but because they tried to have too firm of a grip on it and it didn’t evolve fast enough. But yeah, I can see that happening if Toyota decides not to share their tech with others and hydrogen doesn’t end up being wide spread as a result of it. Not sure if they’ll go bankrupt but still. Honda once almost did when they went all in on Wankel engines.

      • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        They are giving discounts, not paying people to buy their car. It’s a big difference. Government is also giving subsidies for EVs and corn. Should we say government is paying you to buy corn?

    • jaschen@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      But now hydrogen gas stations in California all closed down. So they sorta need to pivit

    • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      They have just released hydrogen internal combustion engine. This engine can burn gasoline, CNG or hydrogen. So transition with it would be super easy. But world is set on EVs which are not that great and a lot less cleaner than people seem to think. Mining for Lithium is a very chemically dirty process and there’s no abundance of it, especially not enough for everyone to switch to EV. Am thinking they realize this and are jumping over the hurdle early on, but are trying to push hydrogen into spotlight. More production means prices will drop and eventually it would get a lot cleaner to produce it as well.

      • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        That’s really not impressive. Lots of people converted their vehicles to run propane or NG during the 70s oil embargo. You can do it with pretty much the exact same piston engine.

        BEVs are far better and yes cleaner.

        More production means prices will drop and eventually it would get a lot cleaner to produce it as well.

        Funny that you think this of hydrogen, but not of batteries. Given that I’ll say cheers.

        • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Batteries are already being developed and advanced. I just don’t see why people think there can only be one technology. Even now we have multiple viable technologies and I see no reason why that can’t keep going on.

          • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            In the small chance you’re serious, because production of, transportation of, leakage of, and burning of gas, ng, or propane still pollutes. Hydrogen can technically technically be done cleanly but is still energy intensive, difficult to transport, difficult to store, difficult to distribute, difficult to store again in your car, and leaks along that whole path. It’s really not a good path. And for what purpose? So you can fill up in a few minutes (assuming the nozzle hasn’t frozen from use, look it up), forgetting that most people can charge their ev overnight meaning they start every day with a full tank.

            BEVs and clean energy has a far, far easier and simpler path forward. Not to mention the development potential of batteries far exceeds that of hydrogen production (production only because there’s really not much that can be done for other parts).

            If you want another solution it’s transit, ebikes, and trains.

            I doubt I’m going to respond any further.

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Hydrogen ICE makes something that was already losing on efficiency even worse. It possibly has some race applications, but probably nothing beyond that.

      • 2xar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        there’s no abundance of it, especially not enough for everyone to switch to EV.

        That’s not true at all. There are 1.4 billion cars in the world now, while the lithium ores that are readily available for mining (22 million tons) were estimated to be enough for 2.8 billion cars a year ago. Twice the amount of cars existing today.

        But since then, there was already another massive stockpile discovered in the US, that alone is bigger than that (20-40 million tons), so enough for another 3-5 billion cars. But there will surely be discovered new sites, now that we are actually, intensely looking for it. We have been looking for oil for more than a century now and are still discovering new reserves. Lithium will be the same.