Which will be the engine of the future?

Its a lame comparison betweem battery and fuel cells. 60% loss for fuel cells includes the creation of hydrogen to transport of hydrogen then to consumer. 20% loss for battery is a lame way to diregard the energy created to make the battery(which is sourced from africa under well documented sources of child labour). Furthermore, the end of battery lifr cycle will then polute our rivers and sea with harmful chemicals due to each countries has individualized uncontrolled practice of disposal. Then the poor countries suffer as the batteries will usually end up in their country as a form of rubbish for cash program by the rich countries.

I think Hydrogen will be more benefitial in aviation industry, power density of hydrogen is crucial for keeping our aircraft lightwheight.

Hydrogen works better for long distance, heavier work loads while EVs are better for short form transportations

I'd rather see Hydrogen win out but I think EVs are going to be the future

Can we get a lector who can pronounce "s" properly?

Your analysis is missing an important factor that of the resources required to build the mobility device either battery or fuel cell. Fuel cell requires less raw materials than batteries, and though batteries might look the cheaper option at the moment, in the future, as the demand for batteries will increase, so does the price of their components, either lithium or cadmium or whatnot. These are what we call commodities, which prices are highly volatile on the international markets while they are coming with a very negative impact on the environment. If you become highly dependent on BEVs, you will become captive of the exporter of these commodities, expose your transportation company to bottlenecks and price hikes. Similarly, there should be a environmental impact score in terms of resources used to build these solutions, battery or fuel cell, otherwise your analysis is fantasy. Yes, the energy required to produce hydrogen might be higher, but what some of the interviewees do not mention is the other functions of the hydrogen, such as medium of energy storage and fuel or component of other industries, such as metallurgical or steel production, or aviation industry (Airbus is studying hydrogen fuelled airplanes) or maritime shipping. When you add up all the domains where hydrogen is the sole non-polluting solution, you realise the potential for economies of scale. The fact that research is just started making steps forward is a reason to carry it on. At the moment, EU has fewer domains where still has a competitive and comparative advantage to its "rivals", i.e., China and the US, and one of these domains is hydrogen related development. Misled analysis can be extremely harmful to our chances of becoming resilient and properly mitigate climate change.

Genius. The goal is to reduce the global warming and instead of co2 emissions they will start pumping water vapor in the atmosphere which is a far more potent greenhouse gas than co2.

How can a company invest in such stuff?!

Diesel!! 💪🏾

Fighting between H2 and Electric just makes the transition away fron fossil longer....
We need a better cargo train infrastructure and bsttery trucks... Everything else is a waste of public money.

Oil corporations are looking at h2 as a possible way to survive, but let's use that on planes and ships, shall we?

How to accelerate all of this? Taxes on transport and diesel, now!

EVs impact the environment in many ways during production and use. People buy EVs for a ridiculous price because they think it's cheap to run and they think it can save the world. but they don't think about the bigger picture . It's a false economy. Full EV adoption is not practical at all. EV batteries have massively increased demand for precious metals , which are mined using heavy diesel equipment . The process ruins surrounding land and habitats for 100s of miles . Electric vehicles are supposed to help the planet , but their batteries definitely create the next trash problem. And sometimes , lithium - ion batteries explode . Also EV charging stations have massive diesel generators to generate electricity to charge Electric vehicles. Those generators run 24 hours a day. Electric cars certainly reduce your carbon footprint , but making the lithium - ion batteries could emit 74 % more CO2 than for conventional cars . Not only these things, there are so many negative things happening behind the "zero emissions EV vehicles" .

Hydrogen make more sense for longer range trip and electric for close range

Not a single mention of the Semi…

Diesel engine

I have an idea: biogas! I live in Sweden, where biogas is crazy expensive at the moment, but in Germany and many parts of Europe, it's the absolute best option if you want to be environmentally AND economically sustainable. Bonus: less dependance on Putin's natural gas. Yay!

The elephant in the room: buy less worthless shit! Would require less trucks with the added bonus of less waste, and force us to focus on other things in life than mindless consumerism.

Check out Edison Trucks. That is the future and you can do Hydrogen / Electric hybrid if you like.

I believe going 100% EV will be a fatal mistake. Why, because a country like the US would require 40 % more electricity to sustain all these electric vehicles.
The US just doesn't have the infrastructure to support such a demand.
It would be better to develop a true hybrid truck. One that would carry it's own generator and charge it's own batteries as needed. You could also run the generator on whatever choice of fuel you want. Why company like Toyota has chosen not to pursue building an EV. Instead they have chosen to pursue building their Hydrogen Combustion Engine.

Don't get me wrong. The use of an electric motor in a class A truck is a great idea. !00% torque @ 0 rpm. The hardest thing the truck has to do? Is get that weight moving. Once the weight is moving? The truck really only requires around half the power of modern day truck to sustain it's speed.

How are they generating the electricity to charge the trucks?

I've suspected that hydrogen fuel is better for heavier freight. This is because the fuel can be more centralized and service transport vehicles more economically. My hypothesis is that fueling long routes and heavy freight like ships, trains, and cargo trucks (in that order) would be the first and most likely to benefit from a hydrogen fueling infrastructure.

Not to have Tesla trucks in this conversation confounds me