Fuel cell stocks have been crushing it lately, but I consider the hydrogen economy to be technological hype. There are many significant obstacles to making it a reality. The future of transportation is almost certainly electric, especially once solid-state batteries arrive.
One example: How many times have you read that hydrogen has a very high energy density?

It doesn't. In fact, hydrogen is one of the **least** energy dense fuels out there.
Writers are often confusing two terms:

Energy density = energy per unit volume
Specific energy = energy per unit mass

Hydrogen has 3x the specific energy of diesel, but 1/5 the energy density of diesel. That's a challenging combination.
Hydrogen's high specific energy and low energy density means we have to either:

A) compress to at least 340x atmospheric pressure
B) supercool to at least -240 C (coldest temperature in the universe is -273.15 C)

Both are very expensive and highly impractical.
This significantly increases the obstacles for transportation applications, storage (at fueling facilities), and distribution (in pipelines). There are ideas for storing hydrogen in metal hydrides or chemically, but none / few are close to commercialization.
Other obstacles for a hydrogen economy:

-Limited transport in steel pipelines (hydrogen embrittlement). Good luck getting it out of the solar-farmed desert.

-Starting input is also primary competitor (electricity).

-Batteries are already better. Wait for solid-state.
One problem that makes the hydrogen economy (or any source of technological hype) seem within reach is how the internet works. Digital publications value volume & algorithm tickling > quality & competence.

You need writers with a pulse, not domain expertise.
Don't forget, it's called Search Engine Optimization (SEO), not Responsible Information Distribution Optimization (RIDO)*.

When articles mentioning PLUG or FCEL rake it in, then writers are incentivized to keep writing them. The more the better.

*Maybe... one day...
Incentives = writers & editors no longer need to be competent. Success is now measured by sounding like you know what you're talking about & "getting your share of the search traffic".

That's how you get writers confusing energy density and specific energy.
This is a problem for us, consumers of information. We can't be experts in everything. The human brain confuses presentation on the internet with authority. When consuming info through screens, it can be difficult to discern the perception of competence from actual competence.
How do I combat information disorder in my research?

Read many sources. Ask "stupid" questions. Read things (or entire books) you think you'll disagree with. Seek out information, not confirmation.

You'll sharpen your objectivity muscles and ditch ideological thinking patterns.
You can follow @7MaxxChatsko.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: