Thanks for the article, Peter
Thanks for the article, Peter. @DeanMcManis you make some good points about the difference between BEV and FCEV refueling in today's early H2 infrastructure. But if you can get your hands on a fuel cell you should give it a try; you might be surprised. The Clarity is the most luxurious car you can get from Honda according to our salesman. And it only costs us $15k for 3 years with fuel included -- that has to be way cheaper than the average Model 3. The Clarity has very good acceleration -- after the first second. I've driven a Model X and the instant acceleration is certainly fun -- but only for the driver and not for the passengers.
Any mention of hydrogen on an EV site triggers a subset of rabid Tesla fans who don't see the bigger picture and who see FCEV and BEV as competitors rather than partners in improving the planet. Let me point out that 35-40% of California's H2 has green or blue (reclaimed landfill methane) sources. So the fact that the much more common industrial use hydrogen is not green is not relevant.
And transportation hydrogen today is expensive for Honda and Toyota and Hyundai, but it is free to me. I did a quick calculation and made a surprising discovery. My 20-mile commute consumes about $6 of hydrogen at $16/kg (and 75 mph). My company provides a 10-person van for a van pool which I often take; that van gets 13.5 mpg and at $4/gallon it costs -- hey, $6 to drive to work! We usually have 2-4 passengers so we just take my Clarity on the days when my wife isn't using it -- she loves to drive it much more than driving our Prius -- and on those days our car pool makes no pollution. (Note that Nikola is planning to sell green hydrogen at $6/kg in two years.)
So, FCEV cars are real and very practical if you live in the California Bay Area or Santa Barbara/LA/San Diego area.
+tom