Hydrogen Fuel Cell Hyundai At Half The Price In 2018

1 year ago by Mark Kane 74

Hyundai ix35 Fuel Cell

Hyundai ix35 Fuel Cell

Ulsan Plant Producing ix35 Fuel Cell

Ulsan Plant Producing ix35 Fuel Cell

Hyundai intends to introduce a new hydrogen fuel cell model in 2018…at around half the price of the current Tucson Fuel Cell according to the Korea Herald.

This new FCV could be the dedicated model hinted at earlier this year.

A quick calculation shows that pricing in South Korea for the new fuel cell vehicle could be around 60 million won (around $54,000 US) or 32.5 million won (around $29,000) after the local 27.5 million won subsidy is applied.  So, still not what one might call inexpensive, but a marked improvement to be sure.

Moreover, the range of new Hyundai FCV is said to be increased from 415 km (258 miles) to 600 km (373 miles).

The sales of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles for Hyundai (and the tech’s supporters) to date have been way below company expectations and aspirations of their supporters.

The latest data indicates a total 544 deliveries, including 77 in South Korea, and over 100 in U.S., and over 250 in Europe.  In July for the US, 8 were sold (33 YTD).

Much of the fuel cell technology advancement and production today is based on governmental support, so lowering the price (regardless of profitability per unit) to show an increase in sales is a necessary action in order to keep that R&D money (and emission credits) flowing.

There is still a continuing expectation by the South Korea government that they will put 10,000 FCVs on the road by 2020, while exporting further 14,000.

source: Korea Herald

Tags: ,

74 responses to "Hydrogen Fuel Cell Hyundai At Half The Price In 2018"

  1. SparkEV says:

    $25K (27K won) in subsidy? If the same level is available for SparkEV, it’d be free!

    As far as FCEVs go, Tucson with small SUV form makes more sense than passenger sedans if one lives near H stations. Can it tow much, like a boat?

    1. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

      Regular Tucson is 1,500lb, but I can’t find anything for the fuel cell.

    2. speculawyer says:

      Seriously, that is crazy. The $7500 US tax-credit is generous but at least it is not ridiculously high. $25K? That’s crazy. That’s a boondoggle.

      I’m for incentives to help green energy but they have to be reasonable. And $25K of incentives for a car is just ridiculous.

      1. Four Electrics says:

        Incentives need to be correctly sized. That means less incentives for established and popular technologies, like BEVs, and greater incentives for fledgling, early adopter technologies like FCEVs. So few FCEVs are made that the actual expense is extremely small.

        1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          Well as long as we’re going to waste pubic funds, tax money, to fund scientifically impractical technologies, why not extend that to perpetual motion devices? /snark

          Funding “fool cell” cars and, even worse, hydrogen fueling stations, benefits no one except Big Oil & Gas. They can certainly afford to fund their own boondoggle. That they’ve actually managed to get politicians to fund their anti-PEV Potemkin Village is a testament to how easily politicians can be hoodwinked, or bribed, or both.

          It would be little more

          1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

            Good worshiper. Musk is happy about you. Or maybe not, as you give bad impression about Tesla fans. But who cares really.

            1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

              We can always count on you to make a few fanboi posts in every “fool cell” related article on InsideEVs, and slam Tesla or Elon Musk while you’re at it.

              I’m a fan of Tesla Motors because the company has earned my admiration and respect for their achievements and their vision.

              Just why are you a fanboi of “fool cell” cars? There’s nothing there to admire or respect, so it appears that Big Oil & Gas is paying you to shill for them.

        2. Nix says:

          4E — Yes, incentives need to be correctly sized. That’s just good policy. Incentives also need logical gradual sunsets. Again, just good policy.

          I think what people are trying to say, is that this sizing is insane, and not logical in any way what so ever.

        3. speculawyer says:

          When did BEVs ever get a $25K incentive?

          1. sven says:

            Up until recently, Denmark.

  2. Robert says:

    Never Gonna Happen. RIP.

    1. Clive says:

      Correct.

      Fool-Cell !!

      1. DJ says:

        I’m sure people said that about the battery 100 years ago. Who knew they were brighter than the rest…

        Who knows what will happen. I don’t see why the EV crowd, you know the crowd that bashes the ICE bashes another potentially viable option. In a few more decades for all we know the “fool cell” crowd will look back at how stupid the current EV crowd was.

        Who knows if it will happen or not…

        1. Clive says:

          It is about dancing with compliance.

          Electric cars were here 100 years ago.

          #fuelcellforfools

        2. Yogurt says:

          “I don’t see why the EV crowd, you know the crowd that bashes the ICE bashes another potentially viable option.”

          Because we dont think it is viable or even potientaly viable…
          97% of the worlds hydrogen comes from cracking fosil fuels so it is nothing more than an illusion that it is green…
          Spliting water to get hydrogen using electricity is also absurd when you can use electricity as elictricity in the first place…
          Hydrogen curently cost far more than an equivelant gallon of gas which costs far more than equivelant amout of electriity to run an auto…
          The world already has the capacity and infastructure to refuel electric cars…
          Hydrogen does not even remotely have a refueling infastructure and it would cost trillions to create one…
          If you actuly think hydrogen is a green fuel you should ask yourself why do gas and oil companies support it???

          1. speculawyer says:

            Good list of a few of the problems with fuel cell cars.

          2. AlphaEdge says:

            Yup, hydrogen will always be made by the worst process possible. Hydrogen tech will never improve, but we will soon have batteries that will allow us to travel a thousand miles, cost next to nothing, and be as light as a feather.

            Nothing but roses and sunshine comes out of the butts of EV fanboys.

            1. Get Real says:

              Can’t ever change the physics of H2 Alpha troll so please go back to SA now.

              1. sven says:

                South America?

                1. Rick Danger says:

                  San Antonio

                2. Timmy says:

                  Sad saps Anonymous

        3. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          “Who knows if it will happen or not…”

          Everyone who is scientifically literate knows “fool cell” cars will never be, can never be, practical.

          That’s who.

          1. sven says:

            Are you a descendant of Lord Kelvin, the scientifically literate dude who proclaimed “heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible”?

            If you’re going to speaking with absolute certainty about the futility of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, perhaps you should start calling yourself Lord Pushmi-Pullyu. 😀

            1. SparkEV says:

              Sung to the tune of Joplin’s Mercedes Benz:

              Oh lord, won’t you buy me a FC-EV
              Tesla-3 is so far away
              Electric bill is so high around here
              Oh lord, won’t you buy me a FC—EV…

              🙂

  3. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

    $54k? So they’re in Mirai territory.

    But if they’re planning on exporting 14k by 2020, expect some good California lease deals over the next few years.

    But, I’m quite a way from California, so if I’m buying in 2018 or later I’ll probably save some money and go for a Bolt, Model 3 or Gen 2 Leaf instead.

    1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

      Current Tucson FC leases for about the same as Mirai in California. This one will be about 30% cheaper in Korea, 60 mln won instead of 85 mln.
      Toyota expects to release its own lower price FC car but some time later, at Tokyo Olympics.
      Hydrogen stations are opening now in the US North East, maybe Canada too, not just California. And of course they are already open in much of the Western Europe, Korea and Japan.

      1. jelloslug says:

        There are a grand total of three stations on the east coast and all of them require an appointment to use.

        1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

          Several more retail staions will be opened by the beginning of 2017. Sure it will not be perfect access for everybody and will not cover whole US next year. Maybe fuel cell plugins like Mercedes GLC 2017 would make more sense for people living or commuting some 10-20 miles from a closest station.

  4. CT200h says:

    Hey I would be interested in this if my toaster ran on hydrogen, and if I had a hydrogen outlet in my garage.

    call me when that happens

  5. mustang_sallad says:

    I’d say reducing the cost of hydrogen is just as important as reducing the cost of the car. I still haven’t heard anyone talk about H2 getting cheaper than gas.

    1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

      I guess you didn’t paid attention. It was studied a lot, there are DOE studies and price targets, and it is expected to match gasoline fuel costs level once/if mass market is reached. High price at pump due to high cost of low volume distribution, not feedstock cost.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Yes, the idea that somehow compressed hydrogen gas fuel could be affordable someday gets talked about a lot by Big Oil & Gas shills, and by people who ignore the Laws of Thermodynamics.

        1. sven says:

          So says the Tesla shill.

      2. Yogurt says:

        So if we spend trillions of dollars on hydrogen infastructure it COULD equal the cost of gas at some unspeciified time in the future??? BRILLIANT!!!

        Or

        I could get an electric car today and drive X miles for a third the cost of gas…

        1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

          You can get rocket and fly to the Moon if you insist, so what? Most people don’t have access to cheap “third the price” electricity. Average US household has access to cheap $0.12/kWh electricity thanks to fracking and trashing of environment that bought natural gas prices and so electricity prices down. Still, $0.12/kWh means 33*0.12=$3.96 per gasoline gallon equivalent. How can it be “third of price” of $2/gal gas when plain hybrid like Prius Eco can do 55 mpg? Unless somebody is challenged in elementary school math. It is no difference in fuel costs, plus you haul heavy battery around if it is long range car, that creates excessive PM pollution from tire wear and raises TCO.

          Still, battery cars are fine for driving around the city and I may use one too as I don’t drive very far frequently. But what you can offer for the rest of the world population when half of it doesn’t even has overnight charging access, nor cheap fracking&trashing powered electricity, or need to make longer and not necessary predictable trips without car renting hassle or buying/keeping second gas guzzler car and waisting time along sloow “fast” chargers? More pipe dreams from Musk “grand” plans?

          1. philip d says:

            ” Still, $0.12/kWh means 33*0.12=$3.96 per gasoline gallon equivalent.”

            Huh?

            Let’s say in bad weather you only get 3 miles per kWh. That’s $0.12 per 3 miles.

            At $2 ($2/$0.12 per kWH = 16.66 kWh. 16.66 kWh x 3 miles per kWh = 50 miles) you would still get 50 miles. At $1 you would get 25 miles.

            In moderate weather getting 4 miles per kWh $1 would buy you 33 miles and $2 would buy you 66 miles.

            1. philip d says:

              Side note. My EV and PHEV, although they get the same range in miles per $2 as a Prius Eco, will blow the doors off the Prius and are much nicer and more fun to drive.

      3. Dave says:

        If it is only going to fall in cost to the SAME COST AS GASOLINE it will lose. Electric cars powered by electricity stored in their batteries are going to be way cheaper than gasoline. It already is. Why do you think continuing to pay for something else that is the same cost as gasoline is going to be attractive, when electricity is way cheaper?

        1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

          How about doing elementary school math before going out with these outlandish claims? Residential electricity from grid is not going down to even double price of gasoline before taxes.
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline_gallon_equivalent
          Off grid electricity is typically couple of times more expensive than grid electricity and PV panels cost is just minor part of it.
          And this is what you will need to use to charge batteries, no other realistic options. For hydrogen production you can use cheapest wholesale off-peak electricity, or off-grid wind turbine as it has very cheap storage option. Average wind generator PPA is just 2.35 cnt/kWh in the US. Good luck competing with 2.35 cnt/kWH energy source when your costs are 12 cnt/kWh :/

      4. Bill Howland says:

        I have seen some artist’s sketches of a typical ‘Corner Store’ Hydrogen dispensery courtesy of (US) General Electric.

        While there was no detail of what was precisely INSIDE the huge building, its square footage was daunting. Besides the fact its over a $million.

        The current equivalent $8 per gallon equivalent of hydrogen fuel seems properly priced, and plenty of it will have to be sold to break-even.

        Of course, it costs a penny’s worth of electricity to get 15 gallons of gasoline (300 miles worth @ 20 mpg) into a large car.

        What is the dispensing cost of Hydrogen? Certainly there must be some large electric compressors in that huge building!

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        You’ll notice that the only people supporting the boondoggle of “fool cell” cars here are the same people who perpetually post anti-Tesla FUD. People like “Four Electrics” and ZZZZZZZZZZ.

        Coincidence? I think not.

        1. sven says:

          You’ll notice that the only people posting juvenile “fool cell” references and spreading hydrogen FUD are the same people who live vicariously through Elon and/or Tesla. People like Pushmi-Pullyu.

          Coincidence? I think not.

          1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

            It is the same in all cults. There is one “true path” and all other options must be hated and denigrated. Musk fanatics are most active trashers of all batter/fuel cell tech that doesn’t have Tesla badge and can even remotely compete with Tesla or cast doubt on Great Greenwasher superiority narrative.

      2. Bill Howland says:

        Well, that article makes it share of ROSEY assumptions.

        1). Use bursts of wind, (which cannot be used to make grid electricity) to energize a intermittently running hydrogen generator.

        2). Electrolysis will become twice as efficient (why they claim this is beyond me – thats quite an efficiency improvement).

        3). Apparently, distribution costs are minimized, but the article did not say where the space/energy savings at the dispensery were to come from.

      3. Bill Howland says:

        Ok, I did find one company making admittedly compelling Hydrogen electrolizer stations, using (they claim) 68 kwh/ kg for 70 bar.
        The commercial price for electricity in my area is around 14 cents/ kwh, or $9.52 in electricity cost, per kg of h2. (A KG of H2, and a US gallon of gasoline are roughly equivalent by heat content).

        Seeing as the fuel cell is not a ‘heat engine’ its practical efficiency is 50% better than an ICE, so that would knock the price per ‘gallon’ to $6.35 / ‘gallon’ in my area for current fuel celled cars.

        $6.35 is reasonable, but not spectacular, considering most gasoline currently sells in my area for around $2.50.

        I’m assuming alternate Natural Gas and/or Coal methods of hydrogen extraction would be used in my area to get the h2 price to be more competitive, but it definitely seems like an unwinable uphill slog.

        1. zzzzzzzzzz says:

          “The commercial price for electricity in my area is around 14 cents/ kwh”
          It is not reasonable assumption that you need to use most expensive commercial electricity price for hydrogen production. Hydrogen provides cheap storage option, and you can use cheapest off-peak electricity. You can get surplus hydro electricity wholesale power purchase agreement for some 1 cent/kWh somewhere in Quebec. You can build your own wind turbine park – no need to wait a year for grid connection opportunity and option to sign PPA with Big Electric at average $0.023/kWh price.
          There is no need to generate hydrogen at every station either. Existing natural gas pipeline network can be used to mix hydrogen with natural gas and separate it later and this mixing is already done in Germany.

          1. Bill Howland says:

            “Cheap Storage Option”.

            I don’t know where you live, but in my neck of the woods, 14 cents/kwh isn’t bad. In fact SVEN will tell you (he’s not that far from me), that in white plains the absolute cheapest juice you can get OVER THE MIDNIGHT HOUR is about 14 1/2 cents/kwh, while paying 50 -100 cents/kwh during the day should your tank run low.

            This usage I quoted is under Ideal conditions, namely, letting the electrolysis machine do the required pressurization. If it is made off site, or even on site and the pressure runs low, then mechanical compression is needed by the dispensery, making the electrical usage higher.

            Yes a gas engine could be used, but then plan on increased maintenance expense.

            Unless you constantly want ‘special deals’.

            As I’ve repeatedly said, with items like 25-27000 dollar windfalls per vehicle, plus all kinds of tax breaks for ‘hydrogen highway infrastructure’, if governments FORCE this to work it will be forced to work, no argument from me.

            I just wonder how much my taxes are going up to finance this, excuse me, boondoggle.

            I say its a boondoggle since without any subsidy at all, at least SOME people would be driving electric cars and having a few solar panels optionally.

            No one will drive a fuel cell car without government largess, which, said ‘largess’ comes from basically theft from me and people like me.

            14 cents per kilowatt hour is what the local corner store pays to sell milk, beer, cigs, and lousy pizza, as well as $0.01 per gallon to dispense the gasoline.

            Its a very honest, apples to apples comparison.

            1. Bill Howland says:

              Sorry, a penny per every fifteen gallons of gasoline.

              If you don’t like my numbers, and the corner store doesn’t either, then the local corner store who is also dispensing gasoline and food will probably install natural gas powered generators and compressors, along with a co-located car wash to make use of the free hot water from the big engine.

              A large car wash chain in my area has done exactly this – but it cannot be located very near any homes because of the racket of the gas engine, which admittedly can be silenced at a cost.

  6. John says:

    Electricity is pretty much the “Universal Fuel”
    You can create it at home, in space, from fossil fuels, from wind, from hydro, etc…

    Why would you choose to be tied to a pump again? Hydrogen is just Big Oil 2.0

    Dump The Pump!

    1. Clive says:

      Bingo!

    2. zzzzzzzzzz says:

      You never ever were untied from the Pump other and tied to the Big Outlet except for golf carts. Few enthusiasts have some tiny share of the market and that is all. 99% cars, trucks and buses on the road still use gas or diesel and will continue to use it for another decade until some better batteries with 2x better specific energy than current Li Ion will go into production.

      1. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

        At this point the challenge is cheaper batteries, not better batteries.

        1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          Yup. We need faster charging batteries and cheaper batteries, and perhaps batteries with better tolerance for high and low temperatures. They’re already small and light enough to be practical for a BEV.

        2. philip d says:

          Yep. Tesla now has a 100 kWh battery for a range of 315 miles. That is adequate for even highway trips. One of the 3 battery hurdles of price, range and charging speed has been cleared.

          Just needs to get cheaper and charge faster from here on out.

      2. Nix says:

        zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

        Spoken like a true anti-EV troll. I swear you are channeling Aubrey McClendon from the dead.

  7. zzzzzzzzzz says:

    Current 2012 Tucson Fuel cell price is 85 million won before subsidies.
    Lease in California around $600/month without down payment including fuel. So you may expect lease reduction at least to $600 * 60 mln/85 mln = $423 without downpayment. Maybe a bit more if current lease includes subsidy that is fixed sum.

    Range reduction from 415 kilometers to 600 kilometers in whatever test cycle would mean EPA range going from 265 EPA miles to 265*600/415= 383 EPA miles.

    Now Musk worshipers may cry how it is bad and how it should never happen, and how did they dared to stray away from the Great Path shown by Great Leader and World Savor E.M. and so on.

    1. Rick Danger says:

      So, which do you drive? A Mirai, or Tucson? You’re so much more intelligent and enlightened than the unwashed rest of us, do tell us which of these miraculous machines graces your driveway?

      PS: It took me all of 15 minutes research to decide that hydrogen is BS, many many months before I ever heard Elon Musk say the same thing. Nothing I’ve seen or read since has caused me to change my mind.

      You hydrogen trolls have zero credibility, and everybody knows it… but you. You must have your head way up in there not to see it. Too bad.

    2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Big Oil & Gas shills like zzzzzzzzzz keep trying to promote the fraud that only Elon Musk “worshippers” oppose wasting money on “fool cell” cars and hydrogen fuel stations.

      Personally, I knew that it was utterly impractical to power cars using compressed hydrogen gas long before I ever heard of Elon Musk. And I’m sure there are many other scientifically literate people who were just as aware as I was, before Elon invented the very appropriate term “fool cell”.

      Compressed hydrogen is a good fuel for rockets. Not so great for cars.

      1. Get Real says:

        And isn’t it funny that Big Oil shills like zzzzzz constantly attack Tesla here, I wonder why???

        I get it, because Tesla is rapidly expanding the EV market with COMPELLING long-range cars that can be primarily fueled at home.

        And that at a fraction of the cost of Petroleum much less the H2 fantasy he tries to perpetuate and DCFC charged to be fully long distance travel capable.

    3. floydboy says:

      The fact that one uses more energy to obtain hydrogen than one can reliably obtain from it, has NOTHING to do with whether or not people like mr Musk! The fact that this Rube Goldberg use of resources, competes with much more efficient energy use for taxpayer dollars, is the source of a lot of the consternation you hear.

  8. speculawyer says:

    “after the local 27.5 million won subsidy is applied”

    Holy smokes. I support tax-incentives to push green energy but that is a ridiculous amount.

  9. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    “There is still a continuing expectation by the South Korea government that they will put 10,000 FCVs on the road by 2020, while exporting further 14,000.”

    As it becomes more and more clear to even those who don’t understand the Laws of Thermodynamics that “fool cell” cars will never be practical, those dwindling few die-hards who still think somehow they might be, some day, have to ever more firmly ignore physics, ignore economics, ignore science, and ignore reality.

    But I suppose there will always be a few who will believe. After all, the scammers who promote perpetual motion scams always find people to fund them.

  10. Four Electrics says:

    I can’t wait to see the next round of price drops. Will it drop 50% again in 2018? Such is the trend of new technologies.

    1. Nix says:

      These price drops have very little to do with the technology becoming cheaper.

      They are actually price increases in a way. An increase in how much of the actual cost these fuel cell makers are willing to subsidize in order to make enough units to justify their programs continue.

    2. Djoni says:

      Hydrogen isn’t a new technologie, neither fuel cell.
      High power battery, however are pretty much the new boy’s in town.

    3. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Perhaps Big Oil & Gas companies will take their cue from cell phone carriers and inkjet printer manufacturers, and give away “fool cell” cars for free, knowing that anyone foolish enough to buy one will wind up spending much more money on fueling them than they would ever save on the cost of the car. Just like cell phone carriers give customers a “free” smart phone when they sign a contract for a year or more of expensive monthly service, and just like inkjet printer manufacturers sell the printers below cost and then charge insanely high prices (like $500 per gallon) for the ink!

  11. JimGord says:

    If they offered me one for free I would still turn it down.

    Hydrogen is DOA

    1. Mister G says:

      I would take a free one and modify it into a stationary fuel cell to power my home.

      1. SparkEV says:

        That’ll cost you more in H (delivered or made at home via electrolysis) than just having grid or solar.

  12. Terawatt says:

    Well this is a surprise.

    Hydrogen fuel cells are just not a good option as long as the world has a large deficit of green energy – because it isn’t an energy-efficient solution.

    It is madness to give such vehicles any public support. And it is even crazier to give them more support than BEVs, which are much better for the environment.

    Yes, hydrogen can be made from renewables. But the route goes via electricity and electrolysis, and with the same amount of electricity you could power three times as many BEVs as FCEVs.

    That means that probably for the rest of this century FCEVs aren’t going to be a good alternative. At the very least, it isn’t worth supporting them today.

    It is worrying that governments don’t seem to put any emphasis on energy efficiency, nor on the fact that for the same investments in green electricity we could power three times as many BEVs as FCEVs. Why is that??

    1. Foo says:

      Oil companies.

    2. zzzzzzzzzz says:

      “world has a large deficit of green energy”
      Frankly, it sounds funny 😉 Are you planning to run out of wind and Sun? You have much more energy than you can ever use. The only problem is how to convert that free energy into useful form with storage that can be dispatched on demand, and don’t waste even more energy building everything.

  13. Some Guy says:

    The fuel cell is a fascinating thing, which can be very energy efficient for small businesses in need of heating or warm water, as they generate quite some off heat (work best at elevated temperature). Personally I think the only reason to have them in cars is to get 7 (?) ZEV credits instead of max. 3 with a BEV.
    The ones for the cars contain platinum (quite a bit more than an ICE catalyst). Platinum is concentrated mainly in South Africa and Russia, and if demand rises due to a high number of vehicles, so will the price. They are mining ore that contains a few grams of Pt per ton of rocks, and it is quite an energy intensive and environmental mess to get the precious metal out. If you don’t mind pollution elsewhere, I guess that’s acceptable.
    Sure, recycling will kick in at some point, but high amounts of platinum from recycled vehicles usually lacks 10-15 years after the first introduction. Given the slow market uptake of FCV, it will not be before 2030.
    Secondly, the high pressure steel tanks are kept together by lots of carbon fiber, which consumes a lot of energy as well.
    Thirdly, the losses of converting electric power (wind or solar) into H2 and then use additional power to compress it (and distribute it safely) are quite large. If one has energy, charge a battery with less loss. If all batteries are charged, use the energy to make more and replace additional ICEs. Electrify freight trains in the US. Get out of coal. Still got excess green power? Export and sell to neighboring countries for a direct profit. Still too much left? Think about pumped hydro. Doesn’t have to be huge plants, it even works with like a few meters difference and a small lake or a river. Out of rivers? Go for compressed äir, there are lots of empty caverns in the world.
    Only when all above options are taken, and there is still excess green energy, one should think of the large scale hydrogen option. Possible applications direct use in chemical industry, or as rocket fuel.
    Just my thoughts. Every 100% ICE vehicle replaced is good one, but in order to make the CO2 targets, one less FCV will equal at least 2-3 more EV.