HYDROGEN vs ELECTRIC CARS whats better - more efficient - cheaper to make and buy??

Question

HYDROGEN vs ELECTRIC CARS whats better - more efficient - cheaper to make and buy??

Answer 1

i Think the Electric car would be better for the enviroment

Answer 2

I would figure Hydrogen cars.

hey, their emmitions(sp?) are Water...

Answer 3

Electric.  Particularly in areas where the E is NUCLEAR.

HYdrogen, as a gas that must be withdrawn from natural gas, is by definition, itself,  (1) exhausting another finite natural resource. (2) hydrogen is nature's smallest atom and leaks through thick metal containers' atomic or molecular structure. If you parked your car at the airport for a considerable time, a substantial amount could leak out.  Storage at a filling station is a significant problem.  3) Hydrogen explodes when it contacts the atmosphere (remember the Hindenburg?) A violent collision could be a minor catastrophe. 4) Solving all these problems will be (is) an expensive research problem 5) The final cost of the hydrogen car and all the expensive transportation and storage problems makes the ELECTRIC CAR LOOK LIKE A DREAM VEHICLE, IN COMPARISON.

Answer 4

itll all be the same the goverment will still want to charge you taxes those basters suck

Answer 5

ELECTRIC comes from somewhere not just your plug socket!

If you are thinking about the efficiency of cars in general then this is intrinsically dependent upon the efficiency of electricity production overall.

Cheaper and more efficient forms of this which may be available with the development of nuclear FUSION (as opposed to nuclear fission) but this technology is in its infancy, and/or with the advancement of better, more reliable and plentiful 'renewables' such as Hydro-Electric, Tidal and Geothermal power.

However Electric Motors are certainly very efficient at least in comparison to the very inefficient combustion engine, which release only a fraction of the energy in oil derivatives into useful output.

In comparison, in the short term Hydrogen provides a cleaner alternative as long as the technology to use bacteria to release large quantities of it is fully developed. This is clean and the only exhaust 'gas' is water vapour. The next hurdle is the storing of hydrogen in a practical form which is difficult and poses even more difficulties than LPG.

A better option may be to use the Hydrogen Fuel Cell, which works on the principle of using the cell to separate hydrogen and oxygen from water to produce electricity, in turn charging a battery, and running an electric motor. This is a promising idea but some of the technology has been bought up by companies that have, shall we say, vested interests.

The Hydrogen and Electric cars of the future may indeed not be separate but working in tandem will produce the best outcome.

Answer 6

If they do use hydrogen, I think it should be used for vehicles like city buses, mail trucks, etc.  Where there are  maintenance schedules are strictly adhered to. Compressed gas tanks have to be hydro tested every 3-5 years. The average person "just puts gas in" and the leak prone explosive nature of hydrogen is just a explosion waiting to happen.   And what about small accidents that nobody reports because they don't want their insurance to go up?  That accident may have damaged a vital component and will go unchecked and not repaired.  

Electric cars are a better choice, Electric cars should be used by individuals, much safer, and we could charge them with electricity generated by hydrogen, photovoltaic or nuclear.

Bustersmycat, How do batteries hold up in the cold now?  But, without a combustion engine, the heat and A/C will have to be generated by the batteries and will significantly reduce it's range.  So in your case a hybrid bio-diesel would be a better choice.  Just like your house, you have gas and electric, some regions use more gas appliances and some use more electric.      

On the conspiracy theory side, the government wants a replacement for gasoline, where they control the prices.  Nobody knows how much hydrogen is going to cost or if "special emmision free hydrogen" is required, so they can charge anything they want.  But we all know how much electricity cost and what to expect.

Answer 7

They're best for different purposes.

Electric cars are better for use arround the city; commuting, shopping, going to the movies, etc.  People doing those don't go very far and can recharge them overnight, when electricity is cheap.

Hydrogen cars are better for long trips, where people can pull into "hydrogen stations" and refuel.

Answer 8

I started to give an answer but it got too complicated.  There are a lot of points each way.  For me, I think an electric car would be preferable in the city, but hydrogen for longer distance travel.  Not sure how the batteries hold up in the cold either, which is definitely I concern where I live.

Really looking forward to losing the dependency on gasoline-powered engines.  Hope the cost-benefit ratios even up soon.

Answer 9

None, Diesel is better and cheaper. Modern Diesels are fun to drive, not noisy, powerful, fast and have no bad emissions. Unfortunately, the Europeans and Japanese are far ahead in Technology, so the USA is still fighting it.

Answer 10

i think electric car is cheaper , best and eco-friendly

Answer 11

It takes energy to make hydrogen for fueling vehicles. That could be natural gas or electricity. We already have the technology to make electric cars and natural gas vehicles, and the distribution networks are already in place for both. Hydrogen doesn't have as much energy as what went into it to make it (it has 50% of the energy of natural gas, if that's what was used). To me, it makes more sense to go with EVs or NGVs instead of hydrogen-fueled cars -- though I'd love to have water as the by-product!

Right now, electric vehicles are easier to buy, maintain, and fuel. I'm not saying it's EASY to do those things, but it's easiER.

Answer 12

If you can find a way to make and store Hydrogen effeciently then Hydrogen is best.

Answer 13

well to wheel battery electric is more efficient (cheaper/less poluting/more sustainable).

Current battery electric vehicle technology can meet most of our personal transport needs eg

200+ miles per charge; 10 minute recharge

http://www.phoenixmotorcars.com

can be refueld at home over existing grid network, and unused power sold back to the grid at peak demand (vehicle to grid -esential for moving to more renewable energy sources).

hydrogen fuel-cell electric vehicles work but are dependent on a new distribution network, an efficeint means of producing hydrogen, a supply of rare metals or new technologies, and compressing the hydrogen so enough will fit into a car for decent range.

You will be able to generate your own electric, but I doubt you will be allowed to brew hydrogen in your basement or garage.

Answer 14

ELECTRIC CARS by far!

We can run all our cars, trucks, buses, and trains on clean electric power!

Go to www.uspto.gov and enter patent number 5,430,333.

There you will see pollution free electric power able to be built to be more than 1000 times that of our largest Nuclear Reactor!

Plant Vogtle, our last Nuclear Reactor makes only a fraction of the power of my patented power plant!

The first generation “baby” power plants from this new technology makes 1000 megawatts.

Vogtle cost $10 billion, 30 years ago.

These new power plants cost $2.5 billion in today’s money.

Vogtle is about to be retired, as are all our other Nuclear plants.

All the fueled power plants only have about a 30 life span.

The power plant design you will see at patent office site live well over 100 years.

They burn NO fuel what so ever!

It costs more to demolish a Nuclear plant than to build one new!

The spent Nuclear fuel has a 25,000 year storage problem with no solution yet, and a tremendous cost that defies accurate estimation due to the very long time frame.

Nuclear power has been estimated to cost more $50.00 per kilowatt hour when the demolition and storage costs are applied.

Guess who gets to foot that bill, the tax payer!

Being fuel-less the design you see at the patent office has a cost of about 3 cents per kilowatt hour.

Coal fired power plants make 8 lbs of air pollution to run 100 watt light bulb for an hour.

There are NO cost estimations for the clean up of all that pollution.

We keep seeing in the news about coal miners dieing in cave-ins.

With the high cost of electric power being hidden for so long by our politicians using their abysmally poor judgment to allow this to happen in the first place.  Then compounding the problem with their constant lying about it to all of us, and the problem now coming to light despite their best efforts to lie and hide it.  We are now stuck with the costs of their abysmally poor judgment after their being “paid” by big power to lie to us about the scope of this problem for decades.  

Call all your elected official state, local, and federal.  Tell them you want the pollution free electric power you saw at the patent office web site!  Tell them to get off their assets and get moving on making pollution free and cheaper electric power happen ASAP!

Or swallow their lies so more until our nation is so polluted our children die younger than ever before.  Cancer is running rampant everywhere, it comes from all the pollution our elected officials are allowing to be spewed into “our” environment every day.  It time to put pollution into it’s proper place, “THE PAST”!

We now have the technology, we can build it, it’s 100% clean, and the electric power is cheaper than ANY fueled power plant.

I’m working on taking my utility company public now!  

I hope to building these power plants very soon!

Answer 15

Hydrogen is better for the environment b/c its formed by splitting water atoms and the two oxygen atoms will go into the air and will replace the oxygen we are missing by cutting down the forest. As for cheapest to make, i think they would be about the same.