It will detect exactly 0 with a 0% margin of error.

You need extreme amounts of energy to break apart most chemical bonds.

As long as nothing is leaking, you should be okay. Just keep an eye out when it starts to thaw, because ice doesn't leak though pipes obviously.

More corporate green washing. Call me back when planes are using hydrogen sourced from green energies like fusion.

What's impressive is that they are creating as much energy as the ignition process uses. That's a major hurdle to overcome because up until now it has always taken more energy to run than you get out. It's the last step before making more energy than you need to run it.

That's true isn't it?

I'm still skeptical. I've seen way too many posts about battery tech over the past decade and it never pans out.

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.

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.

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.

Solid state batteries will never have the energy density of lithium ion unfortunately.

This is the same company that irresponsibly tells people to recycle their dirty pizza boxes.

Yes, I can type 98%+ accurate with a keyboard. If I tried to use dictation I would need to waste a ton of time putting in punctuation and fixing the words the voice recognition got wrong. I am also not a sir.

I can't even imagine trying to program using my voice.

Because my fingers are faster than my voice, and brain interfaces that can type make voice dictation look like a good input method.

Why would the smartphone get replaced? It's already the best form for the job. It's a bit like asking what will replace the keyboard. Some tech just doesn't need to be replaced with something else.

Batteries can't chemically be as energy dense as hydrogen or fossil fuels. They will improve, but not significantly.

If we had the ability to create cheap hydrogen you'd probably have enough electricity to just heat homes that way. Especially when systems like heat pumps can get well over 100% efficiency.

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.

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.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density#In_chemical_reactions_(oxidation)

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".