caledoniandream:
To get hydrogen chemical stable is a difficult process and very risky.
Any contamination while fueling up will make it lethal and a chance of creating a hydrogen bomb.
The tanks to store it are â â â â â â â â â â â difficult to fuel and it takes ages to fill a small tank.
Birmingham University, University of Delft and Technical University in Eindhoven have been trailing with the small Honda car.
Itâs not as easy and straightforward as here above is assumed, we are still way off.
Itâs probably easier to build a small nuclear engine in a car or truck.
Advantage is that you only have to fill up once in a couple of years (bit like the submarines.
At the moment the creation of alternative fuels is going a right direction, chemical created petrol is not that far of, and is to a certain extend renewable.
I definitively see electric trucks and cars for distribution in the cities in the immediate future.
This will go fast.
Regarding V8 power, itâs easy to create an electric motor half the size of a V8 with 2000bhp and treble the torque.
Just try to get a test drive in an electric car, and realise the power is immediate there from the first turn.
Nothing more torque than electric and steam.
Firstly we know that it takes a massive amount of energy to trigger an H bomb so the idea that a dodgy Hydrogen connection leak would cause a nuclear explosion is bollox.When the reality is the stuff is no more dangerous to handle than LPG or petrol is.
As for electric powered vehicles v ICE as I said so long as itâs a matter of freedom of choice then the market can decide what it prefers.On that note itâs not a matter of how powerful your electric motor is itâs how to store and/or deliver that power to the motor.Let alone the reliability and expense of an EV component chain v ICE and the cost of smart metered and distributed electricity.Or for that matter the âfun factorâ in that the average ICE fan,myself included,isnât going to be impressed by some miserable whining EV as opposed to the soul contained in a decent ICE car or truck motor.History also not being on the EV optionâs side in that regard.Meanwhile if electric power is as good and cost effective as the EV fan boys say it is then weâd obviously have expected to see a switch to all electric rail freight locomotives and shipping,as opposed to diesel and diesel/electric,long before now and weâd all be heating our homes with electricity not gas.
Similar dependence on the expensive electricity generating/supply industry being the main downside of hydrogen fuelled ICE.Not the idea that itâs got any connection with an H bomb.But with the upside of that dependence being translated as the wholesale electricity prices available to the Hydrogen producers.Rather than smart metered local EV fuelling provision at an inevitable massive cost and mark up to the consumer added to the equally inevitable rip off of battery costs whether lease or purchase.
Which then leaves the question that this new post fossil fuel world really will be the choice between the far lesser,if not imagined,downsides of fossil fuel use v the all too real downsides of what happens when nuclear energy generation goes wrong. 
