Basically, the Fuel Cell / Hydrogen system becomes a ‘replacement’ for a large battery pack in an EV.

I think it is wise to continue to refine the technology. It may or may not end up in automobiles… maybe it will end up in other forms of transportation or improving the current wave of stationary power generation. The more clean options we have, the better.

Governments and industry can’t make long-term bets on medium term limitations. I always favoured EVs because of the established electrical distribution network, but home-based solar-powered hydrogen stations would change that when the prices (eventually) came down. That’s only one example that could change the equation. It will take 5-10 years to replace even a small number of coal-fired power stations with green power. I can see why car companies are making a bet each way.

Now if they would produce a flex-fuel fuel cell car that could run on any mix of methane and hydrogen, they would have something. But that might actually be successful, so you will never see it happen.

It is very important to remember that petroleum is heavily subsidized & the true market price is severely distorted

Given the efficiencies of ICE engines and not paying the real price of gasoline creates the first real barrier to any alternatives.

Then ask yourself what technologies can directly compete with ICE? Does the technology provide opportunities for market innovations? Does the technology create incentives for independent fueling? How much government funding and support is needed to encourage markets to grow? Can we afford to fund 4-5 different technologies for say 10-15 years? Do you have the funding for the incentives needed to make all the infrastructural improvements? How do you unlock the grip of the inelastic fueling schemes that oil companies have on us? What is the best way to reduce energy conflicts that create global humanitarian, and land resource problems? How do you intend to capture more than 3 percent of the market like hybrids have had with a broad selection of alternatives?

While it sounds good to have a rainbow of choices, the realities are not here, and we must use the technologies that can be brought to market now while spending time with R&D fixing problems with longer-term fuels like hydrogen.

Hydrogen is great but like most nuclear rhetoric no one is actually advocating for the right, correct steps.
Why would anyone put out a car like this when you don’t have the storage or extraction parts of this energy figured out. I have THREE REASONS FOR THIS:

One we go back to the Bush years where hydrogen wooed politicians and the funding of it was in part to squash developing EV’s. Toyota is doing the same here, fool some idiot politicians with this special interest gold mine of a concept to slow down any real change away form ICE. So here it is distract politicians with this and you slow down market forces that could rapidly change the cost, size, and storage limitations of the batteries for EV’s. Also if many don’t adopt EV’s, we could see the strangling of EV’s by battery swapping schemes that would heavy discourage the development of new battery technologies.

Everyone and their mom that blogs on this site cares about Co2, Mpgs, and environmental concerns for any technology in a vehicle. I take a different view and add fueling independence as something that is just as important.
So the point is there are 110 reasons why large businesses want you to always use a fueling station for your fuel and not provide energy to your vehicle yourself.

The next point, how is hydrogen extracted? Right now it is done through the gas that is stored up in petroleum reserves. Has storing it and extracting it been done in a renewable commercially viable way? How much energy is needed to actually produce the hydrogen and can it be done at someones home or do we always need a big oil company to extract and distribute the hydrogen?

Before people again put hydrogen on the same level as EVs ask yourself these questions becasue without really thinking about it, you are being green washed and you are getting ahead of ourselves just as folks are with nuclear when they have no clue about water resource issues or how to recycle and/or renew its byproducts. Let’s first develop the infrastructure not fake distractions that are only meant to egg on short-term schemes.

I’m for electric cars but the time to charge is still too long and once the car uses all the energy in the battery, it’ll become a burden for the car. In the future, this will certainly improve but for the moment . . .
Energy problem (and environment) should be solved by a broad approach.

First of all, it does not make sense to produce H2 to put in cars when electricity can be a direct power source. It’s like inserting a middle man for a product, not very efficient.

Second of all, water vapor emissions may be more effective in trapping heat than greenhouse gas. This trend could accelerate climate change.

Someone needs to soundly address these concerns before I’m sold on the technology.