• paintbucketholder@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    If weight isn’t an issue, then it makes sense to use a system that only costs a fraction of a hydrogen-powered setup.

    Trains don’t need to fly. Just pack them full of batteries or - arguably even better - just electrify the line wherever possible.

    That’s just not an option for planes, so hydrogen remains a potentially viable approach.

    • a_spooky_specter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Same goes for large container ships. It won’t make sense to use batteries unless there are significant breakthroughs in capacity technology.

      • thebestaquaman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        One of the advantages of hydrogen is that tanks and fuel cells can withstand a large number of “charging cycles” much better than batteries. Additionally, for ships, the amount of energy needed to move is so enormous that I fear we’ll have a hard time creating batteries that are feasible for long-distance shipping.

        For short distance ferrying (including large, car carrying ferries) on the other hand, Norway has already implemented quite a few electric stretches. The major issue there is building the infrastructure to charge the ferries.

        • LouNeko@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          No they can’t, the membranes of fuel cells degrade extremely quickly, as I a couple of 100 cycles before significant efficiency loss. That’s currently one of the biggest issues with fuel cells and one of the biggest areas of research. Currently, batteries are far more reliable as an energy source.