Toyota Begins Production of Its First Hydrogen Fuel Cell Car

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
Production has begun in Japan on Toyota’s new hydrogen fuel cell auto. The new hydrogen powered vehicle called the Mirai, fuels basically like a standard car in about five minutes and can then travel up to 300 miles on a fill up. Base price for the Mirai will be $57,500.
 
Hydrogen only works if you adopt a hydrogen economy as a standard. Since its clearly been abandoned as such, I'd guess they are probably just doing it for tax incentives.
 
Mother fucking Toyota, how about you get working on the Mr Fusion already, there's only 10 months left in the year!
 
Very fascinating assembly process.

I... cannot imagine there's any way to even fix it DIY in your garage.

Give or take, for most of the work, you'd need to take it to a Toyota dealership.
 
Well at least one company know Hydrogen is the way to go. With it being the most abundant chemical substance in the universe.
 
Wolf_Tech said:
Well at least one company know Hydrogen is the way to go. With it being the most abundant chemical substance in the universe.
Click to expand...

Since it's not begin used as an energy source, but more like an energy storage medium (think battery), I don't see how it's relevant that Hydrogen is the most relevant element in the universe. The energy ultimately still comes from nuclear/oil/coal/solar/wind/geothermal/dams etc.
 
But we need to save up all our Hydrogen for when fusion becomes mainstream. :D
 
serpretetsky said:
Since it's not begin used as an energy source, but more like an energy storage medium (think battery), I don't see how it's relevant that Hydrogen is the most relevant element in the universe. The energy ultimately still comes from nuclear/oil/coal/solar/wind/geothermal/dams etc.
Click to expand...

The cheapest way to get it is to extract it from oil.
 
I wonder what the torque rating on those battery operated impact guns is like. :D

I hope a lot of those chassis bolts bolts were revisited with a proper torque wrench haha.
 
Wolf_Tech said:
Well at least one company know Hydrogen is the way to go. With it being the most abundant chemical substance in the universe.
Click to expand...

While hydrogen itself is completely safe & renewable, but getting to it is where the issue lies. Problem is that to get hydrogen, many companies dig underground. In the process of getting to it, they do fracking. While you get your hydrogen, fracking releases other harmful substances and CO2 into the air. Fracking is cheap but no good if you're trying to keep it clean.

The only viable option I see is to get hydrogen from salty ocean water. That is perfectly fine. At the moment, it is an expensive way to get hydrogen so companies don't do it very much. Makes me mad they don't do more research into THIS. We can use a clean viable method to get hydrogen for cars and fusion reactors in a few years that companies like Lockheed Martin is working on.

You know what the problem is? People (politicians mainly) don't think long term. People in governments think next election. Private companies think bottom-line right now. Very few want to prepare for tomorrow or think big or long scale. Makes me sad :(
 
Kor said:
Cheapest but not smartest, of course humanity has consistently proved that they don't like smart choices :p
Click to expand...

I don't know, even a flaming environmentalist might go for that if it meant weenimg us from gas stations. We can figure an alternative source later, just get the ball rolling.
 
blade12 said:
While hydrogen itself is completely safe & renewable, but getting to it is where the issue lies. Problem is that to get hydrogen, many companies dig underground. In the process of getting to it, they do fracking. While you get your hydrogen, fracking releases other harmful substances and CO2 into the air. Fracking is cheap but no good if you're trying to keep it clean.

The only viable option I see is to get hydrogen from salty ocean water. That is perfectly fine. At the moment, it is an expensive way to get hydrogen so companies don't do it very much. Makes me mad they don't do more research into THIS. We can use a clean viable method to get hydrogen for cars and fusion reactors in a few years that companies like Lockheed Martin is working on.

You know what the problem is? People (politicians mainly) don't think long term. People in governments think next election. Private companies think bottom-line right now. Very few want to prepare for tomorrow or think big or long scale. Makes me sad :(
Click to expand...

You do know that plants take in CO2 and put out Oxygen, right?

If you eliminate CO2, or even take too much of it away, you have a good chance of killing all plant life, and then all CO2 emitting things would end up dying as well.

Sounds like a great global extinction plan to me.
 
cyclone3d said:
You do know that plants take in CO2 and put out Oxygen, right?

If you eliminate CO2, or even take too much of it away, you have a good chance of killing all plant life, and then all CO2 emitting things would end up dying as well.

Sounds like a great global extinction plan to me.
Click to expand...
The point is that there should a be a balance, and most research shows that human activity is already causing a large increase in CO2 in the atmosphere. There is no need to release more.
 
cyclone3d said:
You do know that plants take in CO2 and put out Oxygen, right?

If you eliminate CO2, or even take too much of it away, you have a good chance of killing all plant life, and then all CO2 emitting things would end up dying as well.

Sounds like a great global extinction plan to me.
Click to expand...

Ah yes. There is that argument again. Time to completely quench it.

1) Nobody says to eliminate CO2. Tell me one scientist on planet Earth that says to eliminate CO2. Good luck because you will not find one (especially one with any sort of scientific or engineer degree).

2) We have direct evidence that links excessive CO2 being released from human activity into the atmosphere is leading to increases in temperatures. http://www.iflscience.com/environme...-evidence-atmospheric-co2-heats-earth-s-crust

3) Did you know that too much oxygen is bad too? You will get something called oxygen poisoning, but nobody says to eliminate oxygen. That would be an idiotic argument. That same thing applies here. Too much of CO2 is also dangerous as you can get CO2 poisoning.

Too much or too little of anything is bad. What you want is a balance. The moment you lose the balance, you run into issues. You want more examples? Too little exercise is no good, too much exercise is no good. Eating too much food is no good, eating too little food is no good. Too much CO2 is no good, too little CO2 is no good.

GOOD DAY, SIR.
resized_creepy-willy-wonka-meme-generator-good-day-sir-i-said-good-day-19cccd.jpg
 
Not too surprising. They are the company who made Prius, which is known to make more damage to earth than any other car. Yes, they advertise for green, but people are dumb enough to buy one for being "green".
 
Propane powered vehicles have been around for quite a long time. LPG works just fine and is fairly clean.
 
blade12 said:
While hydrogen itself is completely safe & renewable, but getting to it is where the issue lies. Problem is that to get hydrogen, many companies dig underground. In the process of getting to it, they do fracking. While you get your hydrogen, fracking releases other harmful substances and CO2 into the air. Fracking is cheap but no good if you're trying to keep it clean.

The only viable option I see is to get hydrogen from salty ocean water
Click to expand...
The problem with getting hydrogen from water is that it is a net energy sink. electrolysis gets you hydrogen, then combining it with oxygen to make energy in a fuel cell ends up turning hydrogen into a battery. When you get hydrogen from hydrocarbons you actually gain energy throughout the whole process.
 
sfsuphysics said:
The problem with getting hydrogen from water is that it is a net energy sink. electrolysis gets you hydrogen, then combining it with oxygen to make energy in a fuel cell ends up turning hydrogen into a battery. When you get hydrogen from hydrocarbons you actually gain energy throughout the whole process.
Click to expand...

Which is why it would be better the build solar/wind powered electrolysis facilities. The loss in energy collected is meaningless in that instance.
 
jpm100 said:
In reference to you link, Correlation is not Causation. But what do you expect Luddites to know about real science. They understand marketing and advertising really frighteningly well though.
Click to expand...

Present real science please.
 
jpm100 said:
In reference to you link, Correlation is not Causation. But what do you expect Luddites to know about real science. They understand marketing and advertising really frighteningly well though.
Click to expand...

So provide me evidence that shows ANY of the following:

a) CO2 is not the culprit for rising global average temperature. Show me what is.
b) CO2 is rising due to a reason other than human intervention. Show me what that something is.
c) CO2 is stable and is not rising. If temperatures are not rising, show me the data.

Any one of those 3 cases. Show me, don't tell me. I will wait.
 
Might as well shut this thread down soon. It's about to devolve into a climate change vs. denier e-peen contest.
 
Lol good luck trying to find the next hydrogen filling station at the edge of the 300 mile operating radius.
 
blade12 said:
So provide me evidence that shows ANY of the following:

a) CO2 is not the culprit for rising global average temperature. Show me what is.
b) CO2 is rising due to a reason other than human intervention. Show me what that something is.
c) CO2 is stable and is not rising. If temperatures are not rising, show me the data.

Any one of those 3 cases. Show me, don't tell me. I will wait.
Click to expand...
a) Show me data where it is the culprit.
b) never claimed this, but I guess you have to pretend you got me somehow.

But anyway I'll give an alternate for the temperature trend, the sun. For example everyday my local temp right now changes 20 degrees in concert with the appearance and angle of incidence with the Sun literally within about 6-8 hours with a slight lag. Maybe long term trends of Solar energy have an effect? Prove it doesn't.

c) never claimed this, see (b)
 
blade12 said:
2) We have direct evidence that links excessive CO2 being released from human activity into the atmosphere is leading to increases in temperatures. http://www.iflscience.com/environme...-evidence-atmospheric-co2-heats-earth-s-crust
Click to expand...

Completely overlooking the fact that CO2 levels were much higher than this in the past solar peak cycles when temperatures raised first, then CO2 amounts went up.

Also the earth is now on a natural rising temperature trend, the climate is supposed to get warmer and completely naturally. After that comes the downfall, a mini ice-age. And boy will we be sorry when that happens!

Climate cooling will destroy much of the fertile farming lands, cause mass extinction of animal species and probably force a large part of northern globe to migrate down south. Global warming then again will bring a bit larger storms but a huge boost to vegetation and available food source.
 
Yes we are are destroying our prospects of prosperity and comfort.
There is no question that sort term 'profit' driven economies have created extremely inefficient use of resources.
It looks good I guess if you look at it with a year to year time frame.. if you look at with 100year mind-frame, or even 50 years, its a disaster.
I don't want to say 'survival' so even if 6 billion of humans die, there will still be a lot left to rebuild humanity.
The planet will be there, no worries there.. which is why I can't really understand 'deniers' .
Its such a stupid position, by this time in my life, I don't even get it, I mean really don't get it... and I get addiction, self-mutilation, suicide.. I get many negative, and twisted thought processes.. I just don't get 'deniers', at all, I can't see the thought process, even with twisted logic/feelings.. the only thing I can conclude, there is none, no process at all.

I am glad Toyota did this. I understand that the hydrogen battery is not a fantasy either.
Basically the cell they have, but it can reverse the process with the input of electricity.
That might come about.
Splitting water is not too hard but it does require power. Reforming fuels make no sense.
The good thing is, hydrogen production can be centralized, and it can be tied to solar plants in the middle of nowhere.
The deserts of the planet can become mayor producers of hydrogen, just because they get baked in sun, and there is little life in them.
Thorium, again, but I guess that one is up to the Chinese.
The hydrogen economy, will basically be infrastructure and distribution.. energy input has to be Solar/Wind, and thorium while it can be depleted, we have a lot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top