We need to focus our efforts on continuing to improve battery storage, weight, and range as that has proven itself. The point of all of this is to get the most range per dollar of energy used. Throwing 70 percent of your energy budget out the window makes no financial sense.

Of the remaining 55 percent, another 55% is lost when converting the hydrogen to electricity, making the effective efficiency only 25 to 35 percent.

Believing that we'll have so much green energy production available that we have the luxury of wasting it on producing hydrogen is a fools errand.

Still no. No matter what fuel source you use to create hydrogen, it's outrageously inefficient. It takes 2 to 3 times MORE energy to drive the same distance in a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle vs. a BEV.

That shouldn't have been necessary, except Hunter was used as a proxy for getting at Joe. Completely justified at this point.

That is the only method of making hydrogen that is green. Unfortunately, it is nowhere near the predominant method of producing it right now. If we can do it without using fossil fuels at all, hydrogen is a better alternative than batteries for many reasons.

Then you fundamentally don't understand the problem. It takes energy to hydrolyze water. Where does that energy come from? Hydrogen is not a fuel source. It's a battery. It stores energy used from other sources. I beg you, please learn some physics.

So, where does the hydrogen come from? Unless we find a source of hydrogen on the planet that doesn't require electrolyzing water, it's not a feasible alternative.

Reader here.