# Musk: Fuel Cells 'Mind-Bogglingly Stupid'



## EVDL Archive (Jul 26, 2007)

Tesla may be working on cars that submerge, cars that can fly, but it won't be powering them with 'fool cells', writes Layla Klamt.

More...


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

> Hydrogen fuel cell technology has been in development for a number of years.


Try "decades." Musk has this one right...


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

True, but battery technology has not exactly advanced greatly in the last decade either !
Lithium has become more widespread and cheaper, but the basic science is the same. 
I would never write off any developing science until it's obviously dead.
It only takes one minor technology breakthrough to push a product from "lab demonstration" level , to leading commercial product.


----------



## WarpedOne (Jun 26, 2009)

> It only takes one minor technology breakthrough to push a product from "lab demonstration" level , to leading commercial product.


Fuel cells need about 10 such breakthroughs to become even feasible and some more to become commercialy viable.

Fool cells is a good nomen.


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

Karter2 said:


> It only takes one minor technology breakthrough to push a product from "lab demonstration" level , to leading commercial product.


Unfortunately even if you had a "magic"
Cheap long lasting fuel cell

You run smack into the basic physics,
It takes about 30% of the usable energy in the Hydrogen gas to compress it to the extent that it is usable in a vehicle

This means that a "magic" fuel cell vehicle has an inherent 30% disadvantage over a BEV


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

WarpedOne said:


> Fuel cells need about 10 such breakthroughs to become even feasible and some more to become commercialy viable.
> 
> Fool cells is a good nomen.


And even even then, the energy-density of Hydrogen is too low to ever fully replace hydrocarbons. You'd think they'd have figured that out already...


----------



## WarpedOne (Jun 26, 2009)

There is one way to 'efficiently' 'compress, store and distribute hydrogen.
It is called oil ..


----------



## sunworksco (Sep 8, 2008)

Hydrogen is highly corrosive. Not a good idea to move it through a pipeline.


----------



## Moltenmetal (Mar 20, 2014)

Hydrogen isn't corrosive per se, but pipelines not designed for it can be embrittled by it. Hydrogen' Achilles heel isn't safety- it's the low energy density per unit volume. As a liquid it's only 75 kg/m3' and any process of densifying it for storage and then re-expanding it for use is a permanent efficiency loss. As well, PEM fuel cells need electrolytic grade hydrogen- low ppm levels of CO are poison and require some gas to be bled from the cell to avoid accumulation- another efficiency loss.

No, it's not just a few technological advances we're waiting for here- with hydrogen, you're fighting basic physics, which is highly resistant to wishful thinking.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Moltenmetal said:


> No, it's not just a few technological advances we're waiting for here- with hydrogen, you're fighting basic physics, which is highly resistant to wishful thinking.


Yep. But it SOUNDS cool - "Just imagine, the only thing that comes out your tailpipe is water!!!"

Billions in taxpayer money have been wasted on this dead-end search for the Holy Grail.


----------

