OptimalConcept143 t1_izzpvjp wrote

Not true, most consumers list range as their biggest worry with EVs, and if you want max range you either need to have as much energy in as little space as possible, especially since you need space in the vehicle for people and storage.


OptimalConcept143 t1_izzo2fm wrote

Listing it in mass density seems misleading when volume density is what matters in things like cars and phones. Generally with normal conditions solids are less dense in volume than liquids.


OptimalConcept143 t1_izznulk wrote

They listed it in mass density because they don't want you to notice how much greater the volume density is. Solids at human scales will pretty much always be less dense in volume than liquids.


OptimalConcept143 t1_iwpo0v5 wrote

Not true. The energy density of liquid hydrogen ranges from 4.5 MJ/L for low pressure hydrogen gas to 10 MJ/L for high pressure liquid hydrogen. Lithium Ion comes in around 0.93-2.63 MJ/L. You can see that on the Wikipedia article linked in the previous comment.

For vehicles such as airliners there simply isn't another alternative fuel that can replace kerosene, it will be hydrogen.


OptimalConcept143 t1_iwpgktt wrote

Hydrogen is the only fuel source that can replace fossil fuels for basically every use. The only reason it isn't doing so right now is because it requires too much energy to produce. If something like nuclear fusion finally happens, this wouldn't be an issue and it would by far be the most efficient and green fuel source possible, and that's from a physics perspective.


As you can see here, hydrogen has more energy density than any other common fuel source, including fossil fuels. It's not a matter of "if" hydrogen becomes our main fuel source, but "when".