I hold my journalistic integrity to a high standard and I treat other people in the industry with respect. Something that is missing with most Tesla and electric car TH-camrs unfortunately
@@chtomlin Who will buy from the US other than Tesla when it turns out it was the US who unleashed the virus in the first place? Two can play that game !
@@leeramer171 well you don't play that game very well, lol. I said DNC China virus from the start, so admitted that the evil side of our country was involved. Just glad you realize this was released on the world by evil people protecting and increasing their power.
You have gold here - repeated interviews with Sandy. I love getting his insights and knowledge, and you have a good insights on what to ask. You do an interview right in two ways. IMHO two things make a good interviewer. 1) Know the intelligent questions to ask. 2) Sit back, shut up, and let the expert talk and range freely in his answer. A fair amount of mainstream interviewers can do the 1st, but far too few do the 2nd. And when you do interject, it's always in a useful way. So thanks! My two cents: There's plenty of room in the EV market for a car with level 3 self-driving, a 300 mile range, and only the interior features and electronic extras of a mid-priced Chevy or Toyota. People carry around their own entertainment anyway, all a car needs is Bluetooth and plenty of charger ports for the family.
Congrats on 100K , well deserved - I like the straight up - no BS approach to your commentary - helps us to navigate all the fluff and get to what really matters. Cheers 🥂
@ 22:00 - Sandy. HFC has been in development since the 1950's. Please explain how the manufacture of Hydrogen fuel cell is more efficient (& environmentally sound) than just using electricity to directly charge a battery? Gasoline is unsafe enough, Hydrogen is more explosive & needs to be compressed. It also seeps through most containers & turns metals brittle. How is the massive infrastructure required going to be safe let alone economical?
Sandy is starting to sound and act like sleepy Joe Biden. Hydrogen fuel cell may have its place but not in consumer vehicles.. I hope Toyota doesn't try to convice governments that Hydrogen Fuel is the way to go. I know Toyota has spent billions on developing cars for this method and they want to see a return in their investment.. Lets hope all the other automakers jump on electric soon so there will be no need for Hydrogen Fuel.
@@mamadouaziza2536 - Apparently, Mamadou, you not aware that "sleepy Joe" beat your boy, Trump's ass in the election and is now the POTUS. I don't know why you felt you had to inject your delusional politics into this totally non-political discussion.
@@danmoyer4650 Trump is not my boy and I don't support him. I was just making a reference to Joe Biden and Sandy because they both stutter on their words and thoughts and are slow..
Does not need to be hydrogen, you can also use methane fuel cells. Instantly wipes out the storage and transportation problems. The benefit is that you can refuel really quickly. Ideally you would have like 20 kWh battery for everyday driving and a fuel cell range extender for longer trips. But mostly I see fuel cells being used in things like camper vans that get used very seldom but then for a really long distance. And what do the 1950s have to do with that? Do you know how long batteries existed before they were mass marketed as an energy source in cars?
I think Sandy is wrong about H2-cars. The production is to inefficient and that is what matter. Just like LPG-tanks in cars people won't like it. And as Alex mentioned: you can't charge at home!
H2 is a hard call . . . for years some technically brilliant people have been throwing cold water on the notion that that H2 production/storage/distribution can be a viable option ( E.Musk & Don Lancaster come to mind ) but to have the big Japanese players putting major skin in the game has to give on pause to wonder what do they know/think . . . .
In Europe, they are removing H2 stations and installing Fast Chargers for EVs. The EV business is more reliable for investors. A fast charger is cheaper, easier and safer and there is plenty of EVs in the market right now. There is no point to invest in an H2 station while all the cars passing are EVs, because there is no fuel-cell car available in the market, well there are... but you can't buy them, and they are really expensive in comparison with EVs
Agreed, H2 (AKA "Fool Cells") are better than ICE, but worse than BEV until the energy to create the H2 is virtually free. Maybe for VTOL flying vehicles.
It's a fool cell, but it isn't as dumb as ICE. Besides transport we're moving towards a fully sustainable green grid. Currently wind and solar are the cheapest power plants. A grid that produces sufficiently on the worst days (no sun or wind) will have massive overproduction the rest of the year, aka superpower, at zero extra cost. Given the foreseeable battery constraints, hydrogen isn't a bad way to store this free superpower. The size of the opportunity for H2 mostly depends on when battery production will meet demand. If we'd have all the batteries we'd ever wanted right now, we'd only be considering H2 for the niche applications where it's technically superior, like VTOL and long range freight vehicles where range to weight matters most. But we don't, so H2 is more viable than most of us would think.
I can charge a BEV at home...can I refill a hydrogen fuel cell at home? Hydrogen makes sense (to me) for electric aircraft (perhaps), but I can't see it ever becoming as attractive as a battery for a privately owned automobile.
The bad fuel problem will keep small cars from using fuel cells. anyone that has gotten water in there gas knows that bad fuel can be a problem. bad electric can also be a problem, but it won't wreck the most expensive part of the car.
I completely agree. For the general public consumer, BEV is the best option. Even though some would argue that the hydrogen station would allow for them to keep their 'trip to the gas station' mentality and make it easier to transition, I think that is just said because the general public has not been educated (marketing needed) on the benefit of not having to do that anymore. The only real advantage of hydrogen (for now at least) is the quick refueling capability. For long trips charging a BEV adds a lot of time, but can be used wisely if planned (such as stopping to eat), but if you are in a hurry that doesn't really work well. Hydrogen I think would be the very best option for commercial transport vehicles, where they need to cross a very large distance in a very specific timeframe in order to get paid. Having to just use a hydrogen pump to refuel similar to a diesel pump will help them transition and keep their targets intact without much change in behavior (just need the refueling infrastructure for this).
@@chriscalvert4423 Agreed. That is why Airbus already presented their vision of hydrogen powered aircraft. Once we get those up and running, then there are only ships remaining.
Hydrogen could be more popular for commercial and fleet operators. In my experience BEV refuelling at home ( for those who have parking facility /garage at home ) is way more convenient than going to petrol pump or hydrogen pump. Home charging and one pedal driving are such underrated feature of BEVs.
I think Sandy is great and accurate on anything but his support and praise of Hydrogen ABSOLUTELY MAKES NO SENSE. It fails in so many ways. From cost and difficulty to building fueling infrastructure, to inefficiencies, wasted energy to produce and transport to fueling stations. To dangers from leakage and explosion risk in accidents. To Tanks in cars taking up larger spaces and cutting down on storage in vehicle. To lack of ability to fuel and home and depend on stations just like gasoline. In addition to aforementioned having to transport to fueling station over road with trucks. It is doomed to fail. Hyrdogen vehicles are just electric vehicles with a smaller battery. Nothing more than a plug in hybrid with both battery and gas/hydrogen systems in it taking up more space with more to go wrong.
You can generate hydrogen for free at home using energy from solar panels and generate hydrogen all day when you are at work. What is dumb about it ? You car fuel your car in 1-2 minutes when you will be back from work (when the sun does not shine on the panels to generate enough to charge the car). Or at any time.
I used to work for one of "the big three", and Sandy is 100% right. The legacy OEMs are still in denial. The move to EVs is more about Tesla's stock price than it is a change of heart. Their whole model of doing business (with dealer networks making money on service) are ill suited to an EV world. Most of them are on borrowed time.
J.P.M., Your observation doesn't surprise me. When Munro say they are wishing for the old days to come back it's history repeating itself. Back in the seventies they kept pushing big cars because they thought those little "fer'n" cars were going to dry up and blow away.
@@men2dewy You mean big cars like Gremlin, Pinto, Vega, Mustang II ? :D That were the compact class attack of US manufacturers that started in 1970 .... then it followed by Dodge Omni, Ford Escort, Festiva but such small cars did not sold in big numbers ....
Right. The big question about using fuel cells for planes is that fuel cells currently have a poor power density, but Toyota is improving that, and you can have auxiliary high power batteries for vertical takeoffs & landings. I'm iffy on hydrogen as a fuel even for long-range aircraft due to how low-density it is, but methane fuel cell setups are also a viable option, as long as your fuel cell can handle carbon monoxide from the onboard steam reformer.
Planes and ships are the ideal application for fuel cells. Less vibration (which drastically shortens the lifespan of fuel cell stacks) and a steady load (so no need for large buffer batteries). The load profile and environmental conditions in cars, trucks and locomotives are poorly suited for FCs.
Alex great job halting the hydrogen conversation for another show. Sandy is not considering the power of consumers charging at home and having control. Always great programming!
Not everyone will charge at Home, or can charge them even if they wanted to. Charging at home is also going to get a lot more expensive as more investment will need to be put into the grid.
@@blaccsnow I think you will find the opposite will be true. Assuming people will have solar and that it will be able to produce what they need might prove to be incorrect. It is a lot easier to fill a car up and be good for a week or two than to charge all the time.
What is the problem in having solar panels -> use the power at day to do the electrolisys of water and store hydrogen -> and then tank it when you get back home on late afternoon, when your solar charging is not working or barely working ? What is the point of charging at home when you charge at night from fossil fuels ?
Sandy really hits the nail on the head when he talks about psychology. The reality is most electric car buyers have no interest in buying a Ford or VW. So the challenge it seems for legacy auto makers is turning their current customers who are buying ICE vehicles into electrical buyers without losing them to Tesla or -they actually do want electric car. Ford sales guy: hey Mr. Buyer, have you considered the new mustang electric car?! Buyer: electric?! No, I had not considered buying an electric car. Sales guy: you should, it’s the future! Buyer: OK, I’ll give it some thought. Buyer goes home and discuss with his wife who mentions she really likes the Tesla model Y. One of her friends just got one after all and can’t stop raving about it. Tesla makes another sale. I really hope that the legacy auto makers (the American ones anyways) figure this out but they have a very long road to hoe.
Except Tesla is a niche vehicle for early EV adopters. Four models all basically the same. Let's see if they can catch up to the legacy manufacturers as the CUV's, minivans, real pickups (i.e. the design form that's been around since 1940's), and the other models that people buy because it is what they need for their family or work through the different stages in life. But it's possible some people could have a Tesla on one side of their garage if they come out with a model that is compelling for what any particular individual needs. Personally, Tesla does not have or announced a model that I would buy yet. There are so many brands and dozens of different models and types of vehicles because no single company can produce what everyone needs in life.
@@davidmccarthy6061 you are preaching to the choir. I plan to replace my Lexus GX 470 with a cybertruck as soon as possible. That will then remain parked in my garage next to our Toyota Sienna minivan until Tesla comes up with a vehicle that will replace it as well.
It works great for the gas and oil industry due to the immense amount of energy it takes to produce hydrogen. All it takes is the lobbyist to drop off briefcases full of cash in D.C.
If gas never existed and we started building hydrogen cars first and only, then maybe it could make sense. But at this point you're building up the equivalent of an entire gasoline infrastructure with VERY few benefits over either gas or electric.
Gonna depend on the cost of the hydrogen. If it miraculously drops in price, there will be potential, but if it comes anywhere near the current cost per distance as fossil fuels then yep, its dead on arrival for consumers. If my home solar can EFFICIENTLY generate and store hydrogen with my excess power so I can fill the tank when I get home from work, then you might just have a paradigm shift, but I can't see that happening in the next 20 years. Tesla HydrogenWall ain't about to happen :(
It feels like with the Hummer, GM is chasing after the old Hummer customers that had a lot of money and wanted the image, never mind the poor fuel economy. Now it will still be for those that can afford one but at least they can feel good that it is electric.
One thing not mentioned is how current OEM dealerships and salesmen will sell EV's knowing that they won't get the type of income from servicing them that they do from ICE vehicles. It's a change management challenge that the new EV manufactures won't have to deal with.
California taxpayers have funded tens of millions of dollars in subsidies to build hydrogen fueling stations, yet there are only 43 stations in the state which is not nearly enough;. Nearly all states have zero hydrogen fueling stations. The fuel cell technology isn't the limiting factor for hydrogen vehicles. The problem is the lack of fueling stations. It would require hundreds of billions dollars to build a good nationwide fueling infrastructure.
I think the US-centric view is really sleeping on Hyundai/Kia - they're going to progress in the EV market rapidly. Both have solid offerings already but this year they start unloading their next gen, pure EV platform products such as the Ioniq 5/6 etc (nothing like the existing Ioniq), they're taking it very seriously.
I think the Mustang Mach E will outsell both the Rivian and especially the ID4. Looks + legacy. F-150 and Cybertruck around the corner, many will wait for those
I'm surprised how little emphasis is placed on self driving and safety capabilities when comparing Tesla to other manufacturers. That's true for other evaluators as well as for Sandy. Tesla constantly collects a gigantic amount of real time data from their cars on the road and feeds it to their artifical intelligence software which in turn improves both safety and the robustness of their self driving capability.. I'm not aware of any other manufacturers doing this. Certainly not on this scale. That's a huge advantage.
Like the phantom braking! Several Tesla owners were talking about it. Not every one wants self driving! Why would you pay 10,000 dollars so you can your hands off the wheel and not pay attention to road conditions! Very dangerous for other people on the road.
It is evolving but nowhere near mature enough technology but perhaps in another 5 years they'll be near level 4-ish. They definitely have the low hanging fruit worked out but staying in a lane and seeing other cars is the easy part. I'd say it is currently about a 16 year old. You're past your learners permit but haven't yet experience enough surprises on the road to be able to handle those. Although it is way better than a boy in a Mustang V8. And we're all waiting on the court cases to establish who is at fault, the driver or Tesla's programming. Not to mention the ethical issue of an unavoidable crash; kill the occupants of your car or kill who you are running into? Right now it's the humans fault but we'll see how that changes in the future.
@@tbone9405 Realworld data shows Tesla autonomous driving is twice as safe as manual driving - and it gets better with time. Humans can be horrible drivers due to falling asleep, distractions like texting, and intoxication. Also seniors benefit as reflexes diminish. As far as cost goes, a subscription is being considered so you would pay by the month instead of inclusion in the initial purchase. That's a trend in software in general. Also, getting a crashed car repaired could easily be more than the cost of the software not to mention physical injuries to occupants.
I always hear everyone talking about the Rivian R1T, along with me since I have put down my deposit for one. But not hearing anyone talk about the Lordstown Endurance. They are supposed to be in production this fall. Is there a reason?
Hydrogen is not simple... it takes more energy to produce than you get out of it... add to that the energy in chilling it down to store it (with out that you can’t effectively store it - it leaks at room temperature). It’s a staggering the inefficiency.
Electricity also takes more energy to produce than you get out of it ..... power lines transfer and change to low voltage loss is about 11%. Then you got the heat loss while charging the battery... You don't have to store hydrogen in low temperatures only (as the liquid) -- there are new ways of storing hydrogen in room temperature that are being worked on (what freezer has the Mirai ? none ? ).
Shocked by his views on H2. Aside the woeful disadvantages with respect to cost (purchase price and fuel cost) and home refuelling, I cant see anyone spending a trillion on H2 fuelling stations when BEVs are everywhere and electric range is 400 mile +
How much does it take to charge the car for 400+ miles ? When highway driving with AC, and higher speed like 80-90 mph that is 200miles maybe.... and what about towing a trailer ? How long does it take to refuel a H2 tank ? Home refueling easy -> solar panels -> electrolisys to generate hydrogen -> afternoon 5 minute refuel from a home tank...
@@wyrazowfkp that's a pretty significant set up for home refueling on H2. You may be able to generate the hydrogen but the other aspect is the safety factor. H2 is notoriously prone to exploding and I don't think most people would really be willing to take that chance at their home. Now, for fuelling at a station, that's the big advantage. As fast as fueling now is a minimal behaviour change for people. The issue for H2 on that end is the chicken and egg problem. Toyota would need to jumpstart it to make it viable.
@@wyrazowfkp (message to myself) this is going to be my very last message about H2 anywhere on social media. The yearning for H2 comes from people wanting to stick with the current method of refuelling a car. Ignoring the numerous downsides (car cost 2x battery when not subsidised, fuel cost 5x home charge, overall time, convenience most of the time) and the economic barrier which is literally a trillion dollar cost that no one is willing to pay , fuel costs and the first mover advantage of batteries freezing out H2. Car cos had their chance ten years ago with FCs and didn't take it. With a change in habits of refuelling when doing something else, which will become second nature it will soon seem bizarre to anyone that the idea of installing a potential bomb in your house and pay 3x the cost to refuel so that a handful of times a year you can save ten minutes on a refuel, is a good idea. And that's it for me, I'm done arguing on this dead end.
@@wyrazowfkp Refueling an H2 car with pressurized hydrogen, you are always at a constant risk of getting filled with shrapnel. No thanks High pressure or cryogenic anything just won't work at the consumer level imho
In a first- principles sense, hydrogen is the lightest and most energy- dense element in the universe, as lithium is the lightest metal. Hydrogen burns cleanly. I can see where excess solar and wind power generation could pay for generating hydrogen. However, at this point Tesla's 4680 cells direct to structure with electric motors is too simple and elegant and efficient.
Hydrogen is energy dense for its weight but not its volume. In terms of volumetric energy density, hydrogen has about a quarter of the energy of gasoline. This means you need a tank 4x the size of a gasoline engine to get the same amount of energy. Sure it’s weight is less, but the size is an issue. And it needs to hold the hydrogen at very high pressures. And you have other issues like metal embrittlement with hydrogen. Just to clarify too, you don’t burn hydrogen in a fuel cell.
Where do you get hydrogen (H2) in its natural form? I’d rather get energy from the sun (solar panels) than break down H2O and transport it all over the country
The legacy manufacturers are saddled with dealers. In my experience, the dealers hide the few electric vihivles they have at the back of their lots and their salesman dissuade you from buying one. There's no routine maintenance profit for the dealer with electric vehicles. The legacy manufacturers can succeed if they sell directly to the consumer.
What Tesla lacks, and Sandy points out partially in the most recent video on his channel, Is industry people who know how to design for manufacturability. He is tearing down a latest version Model 3 and finding many areas of the body that are poorly engineered. This is largely why Tesla continues to have fit issues with doors and panels. These problems are likely to get worse as the cars age. What Sandy doesn't mention, and it may not be important to him. is the styling and material choices Tesla makes. Simply watching experienced EV reviewers seeing the Taycan, Polestar 2, and Mach E for the first time and seeing their visceral reaction to these vehicles, and the way they universally say "better than Tesla" tells an important story. Putting the spec sheet aside most car purchases are made based on emotion. What someone thinks of a car comes from the way it looks, the styling of the interior, the materials used, and how it makes them feel. No existing OEM would tolerate a CEO smoking marijuana on camera, being convicted of stock manipulation by the SEC, Calling fandom people pedophiles, or recommending unproven and ultimately useless medications (just to mane a few incidents). These things may not be a big deal to Tesla's devoted fans but they have absolutely colored the public perception of the brand. That Tesla has disbanded its small PR/media department is a hopelessly immature move given Tesla's image with the average consumer may well be its greatest challenge. Sandy is right that it is legal teams holding up autopilot. This was the obvious outcome from the start. Accidents will inevitably happen. When a driver is at fault in a fatal or injury crash there may be criminal charges but more significantly in this case there will always be civil liability. Individuals carry insurance and settlements are usually limited to what an individual may reasonably be able to pay. There is no point in getting a $5billion judgment against a warehouse worker. If the driver, however, was a team of programmers working for a multibillion dollar corporation the court case will be quite different. See what the lawyers call "deep pockets." Simply look back at the vehicle fire death judgments in decades past won against GM and Ford. One day autopilot will be forced to choose whether to kill a child on the sidewalk or the driver of the car. In either case Tesla is going to get sued and it will be ugly. No insurance company is going to be willing to cover that. I see no solution to this problem and, as I said, it was obvious from the start. For me personally I find the cars gimmicky and cheap looking for the price. I realise the touch screen is primarily there to cut costs. It eliminates countless switches and wires but is a cumbersome way to control a vehicle, especially while driving. The novelty is already wearing off. Note customers and reviewers complaining about the number of touch screens in new non-Teslas, and how everybody likes Ford's volume knob. With all the advantages Tesla has it is extremely frustrating to me to see them fail to take the business seriously. Fans love the cars warts and all. Tesla isn't even on the leader board in Europe now that they face competition. That's certainly why Musk just cut the base Model 3 price by $4,000. Buying market share is not the best way to boost profitability. Today that competition is coming toward the US. Tesla needs to wake up.
@ Bill Kerr Elon Musk is a man on a mission and that is in a world that we can thrive and live in without choking to death on our own pollution you seem to be the most negative person on the planet and oblivious to the goals at hand Tesla's very existence is about providing cheaper greener cleaner vehicles to the masses and they don't buy thier market share as you are suggesting and unlike you he is a realist ,he may not be perfect and contradictory at times but he puts his heart and soul into what he believes is ethically correct and good for society ,I am one of many who believe and trust in his judgement he is without doubt the best thing to come out of America to make the whole world wake up and take notice for decades and good on him, he is a game changer who wants to make a difference to the planet period!!!
@@iandawson9945 I am very much a realist and don't buy in to emotional content. I do worry that Musk's inevitable fall from grace will damage the whole EV revolution he put into motion. Blind devotion is a religion, not realism.
Tesla is the only auto startup to survive the “financial valley of death” going from losing money on one low volume car to making money on higher volumes and multiple models. And even if you could do all of the above there is the problem of getting customers. Without buyers, it would be a total DISASTER . The startups that do not have the money to lose $10 billion are going the sub-contractor route, like Fisher.
Lee Tran "12$ per kg of liquid hydrogen... no thanks" He's talking about the future. The first CD players were $1200. Are you new to how technology works?
@@SamIAm-kz4hg in Australia, there is a company produce Hydrogen for 20 years... 12$ is the lowest they can go :). As a super cheap investor, I'm waiting for 1$ per kg. then I will go and buy a Toyota Mirai
Ask hydrogen vehicle owners how much hydrogen they lose every day when the vehicle has to vent it out because the hydrogen in the tank was getting too warm
Sandy, I don't see the big gas guzzler companies.. GM has an history of electronic problems in their ICE vehicles (I have owned several). The psychological issue I have, can I trust GM with an EV (Bolt included)? I am a consumer (not an engineer). My concern is based on ownership. A Rivian teardown would interest me more.
I think Sandy grossly underestimates the dishonestly and amorality of the VW execs. This was not a “little bit of cheating” - it was massive, for a decade, and demonstrably killed people due to excessive emissions.
... and it was a common practice in the automotive industry. I'm not trying to defend VW here, but other manufacturers (GM, Toyota, Ford, Crysler, Honda, Renault, Jeep, Caterpillar, Cummins, Mack, Volvo, ...) were caught doing exactly the same.
@@andrewmeehan6151 Have you looked up how much hydrogen cars weigh? in most cases they are about the same weight and sometimes weigh more than the equivalent electric car. Also hydrogen cars are electric cars just more costly and more complex. The drive train is also a lot bigger do to the fuel cell and the hydrogen tank. Hydrogen cars need batteries and electric motors to operate. But on top of that they need the fuel cell as well as the hydrogen tank. So it's just an electric car with more complexity that adds weight cost and is less efficient all at the same time. Also, hydrogen is the most common element but it's not usually on its own. It's almost always bonded with other elements there for you need to use energy intensive processes to refine it like electrolysis. Therefore saying it's the most common element in the universe is a misleading statement. It makes it sound like its everywhere and easy to produce. When in reality, that is untrue. There are basically 0 advantages to hydrogen other than range and a truck load of negatives. There are so many reasons hydrogen doesn't make sense for cars and thats just the tip of the iceberg.
@@zoron9102 I respect your opinion but I'll contend that while hydrogen isn't ready for primetime yet, crazier things have happened before. If I assume for a moment that hydrogen is cheaper than gas, and a method is discovered to make it easier to produce there will be a huge market for it. I used to think that Sandy was just another Tesla fanboy, but it is clear to me now that he really does know what he is talking about and is completely unbiased. Hydrogen is likely a decade or more away, i'll give you that, but there is huge upside. I was reading that hydrogen cars might eventually have over 1,000 miles of range. Battery powered things are great, I have battery electric lawncare tools, and like them, but I am worried that like my IPhone, the battery will lose it's capacity after just a few years. Look at the recent car and driver review on the Model 3 and you will see that over time, the cars do lose significant battery range.
Alex@ The next time you see Sandy make him defend his statements about hydrogen, you are right it's DOA, he's flat out wrong. The only benefit of hydrogen is faster fueling and that's going away, you don't need to charge a car in 5 minutes, 10 to 15 minutes is fine and we are almost there. As charging curves improve over the next couple of years we'll be at a comfortable 10 minutes. With BEVs you only fast charge on road trips the rest of the time you charge at home which saves you not just the charging time but more importantly the trip to the fueling station. On a road trip you need to stop and pee every few hours anyway which you do while the car is charging. HEVs require just as many trips to the fueling station as gas cars except that the fueling stations are either non-existent or way less convenient than a gas station which are on every corner. He made the statement about lugging around a battery which implies that a fuel cell is lighter. Look at the numbers for a Model 3 and the 2021 Mirai Model 3 SR+ RWD, 3554 lbs Model 3 LR AWD, 4036 lbs 2021 RWD Mirai, 4255-4335 lbs A RWD Mirai is 200-300lbs heavier than an AWD Model 3. Where is this weight savings? People make the mistake of comparing the weight of hydrogen fuel to the weight of batteries, if you are going to make that comparison it should be the weight of hydrogen vs the weight difference of a charged battery vs and empty battery it's 0 for the battery. The real comparison is between the weight of the systems not the fuel and as you can see from above fuel cells offer zero benefits in a car. Now lets look at the difference between the new Mirai and the Model 3. The Mirai is more expensive, it's performance is much worse, it has less space. In Doug DeMurro's review, you can see that the back seat is almost unusable, there is a fuel cell where the frunk should be and to top it off there is a hump going down the middle of the floor like an ICE car. The cost of running a hydrogen car is prohibitively expensive. Toyota is hiding the cost by bundling it into the price of the car but the bottom line is making hydrogen and converting it back to electricity in a fuel cell has 1/3rd the efficiency of just transporting the electricity over power lines and putting it in a battery. That's 3X the fuel cost for an HEV vs a BEV. Finally building a fueling network can't ever happen unless a spendthrift government want's to pay for it. BEVs only require 10% as many fast charge stations as gas stations because 90% of charging is done at home. HEVs require just as many stations as gas cars, that's a huge numbers. Hydrogen stations also cost much more than Superchargers, about 10X as much. A DC charger is a simple device and it's easier to site because it's safe. Hydrogen requires huge high pressure storage tanks and trucks with high pressure tanks to transport it, that's expensive and it's not going to get cheaper. Plus you have the chicken or the egg problem. Nobody is going to spend tens of billions building hydrogen stations until there are hydrogen cars on the road to use them. But no one can buy a hydrogen car until they they have a place to fuel it.
I was expecting Munro would say hydrogen is suitable for marine ships and long range freight trucks. But cars!!? With all my respect, I believe he got it wrong.
@@harsimranbansal5355 Agreed. On a side note, I would love to see hydrogen (clean hydrogen) use in marine ships and long range freight trucks because they are huge polluters.
@@100forms8 also ships have the advantage that weight and size are no issue, so you can use less compact fuel cell designs - which require less rare materials and therefore are cheaper to build. Plus: there are less vibrations on ships, which severely limit the lifespan of fuel cells in road vehicles.
@@100forms8 It's a different type of vibration, lower frequency and typically no sudden changes/spikes like on the road. Much easier to isolate if necessary.
@@perpedersen6249 2025 is the date, but Norway is not “banning” sales of ICE cars. They just have a goal of 100% electric. If someone wants to buy an ICE car and is willing to pay the huge taxes, they still can after 2025. I think Norway sales will be 95-99% electric by 2025 and that will be considered a success by Norwegian people and their government.
I think Sandy is wrong about Hydrogen. So far we know we wont have any cheap way of producing cheap hydrogen and that exactly is the bottleneck for the forseeable future. So I am a bit surprise that he has that much hope for it. Seems strange considering his foresight so far.
@@user-RCST Yeah and I don't even mention efficiency. Hydrogen would have to be very cheap as consumption is way too high . We know green hydrogen can be achieved with wind and solar overbuilding, though I am sure most understand this will take another decade, sadly. Even then hydrogen is way better used for industrial purposes replacing coal and fossil oil. There simply won't be as much supply meeting a possible demand from cars.
The largest problem legacy manufacturers will have is financial. They will need to sell at a profit while writing down stranded engine manufacturing assets. The ICE vehicles are dead and they just haven’t laid down yet.
Very insightful and interesting remarks by Sandy Munro. I too, was surprised about his views on hydrogen and await another discussion on that topic. At 22:30 , he noted “I don’t want to carry a battery.”
“I don’t want to carry a battery.” - good luck finding a FCEV that don't has a battery :-) Ok, the batteries are smaller, but with all the other stuff (pressure tanks, high pressure plumbing, fuel cells) a Mirai weighs just as much as a BEV of similar size (and has a smaller trunk than most).
He does qualify it with "if they can figure out the technology". What if you could have a hydrolysis unit at home ? Just add water and solar ... the benefits of both home charging and instant refill on the road. Personally I just don't like the thought of a highly pressurized hydrogen tank in my car or in my garage.
There is no problem in refuelling hydrogen at home -> it will be even more convinient .... All the sunny day you are at work --> solar panels will generate energy used for electrolisys of water --> and store hydrogen in a small tank ....when you get back from work in the evening you will have a full tank of hydrogen to fuel the car or to use to heat the water/house .... much better than wasting all the power at day for nothing.
Sandy, (quoting Vokswagen) says, "We're going to pump out EVs like there's no tomorrow." I think maybe what he meant was, "We're going to pump out EVs like there is a tomorrow."
Technology advantage is not as important as cost advantage An example is CATL iron phosphate batteries. They are far worse than what tesla currently uses so why are they moving to the inferior iron phosphate batteries? Well it's simple cost advantage is more important than technology advantages This is even true in your daily life When you buy a laptop what is your consideration? To get the absolute fastest CPU fastest RAM fastest Hard drive fastest everything or to get an affordable package?
@@davidmccarthy6061 With BEVs making up less than 1% of the world's car, you can't technically knock out any other technology yet and that includes hydrogen. As much as I don't like it, there may be things we don't know about it
@@Joda30088 Very true but I'll remain very skeptical. But I'm not smart enough to imagine someone overcoming its limitations in time to overcome the massive investment in battery technology. We'll see.
The saviour for hydrogen vehicles I think is going to come from the Military and it is nothing at all about going Green. Probably joining to many dotted lines than is wise, I expect we will see small transportable nuclear reactors transforming water into hydrogen to power the military anywhere in the world. Quick to fuel and only needs water which they must transport anyway to make more, it all makes logistics that much easier and a big tactical advantage over petrol & diesel. I say hydrogen but in reality battery / hydrogen hybrids. Just an opinion. For the majority of cars though I think battery power still has too many advantages over hydrogen, especially as more homes get solar and storage batteries.
Nuclear is in fact all about going green: the result of nuclear deployment will be less resources from nature, less waste to nature, less space stolen to nature, it will be the real decoupling of humans from nature, thanks to the high energy density, ultimately it will result in more prosperity for more humans. Wind and solar are the opposite: far more usage of nature (to make the devices that harvest them; currently, they are made mostly in China to falsely show that they are affordable/sustainable, of course using/destroying a lot of nature, with little/no results in terms of human carbon footprint) for far less humans on the Hearth, due to the low energy density, ultimately it is the return to the middle age poverty, in which those in fact were the energy sources.
Munro is so wrong on hydrogen. It's way harder to deal with compared to battery storage. Remember that hydrogen is not an energy source: it's a (poor) storage medium. Converting to and from hydrogen is inefficient.
Also, apart from the lower efficiency, all parts involved are more expensive and require more maintenance than batteries. Oh and btw. you need batteries anyways, because fuel cells cannot compensate for quick load changes (plus: you really don't want to pay for a fuel cell that can provide your car's peak power but is under-utilized 90% of the time). And did I mention that fuel cells in vehicles only last about 5000 to 10000 operating hours (because the thin membranes cannot handle vibrations all that well)? And the buffer batteries also have a shorter lifespan than in BEVs (because they are smaller and thus cycled more often). Hydrogen makes sense in planes and ships, where the drive runs at a fairly constant load. Also, especially in ships weight and size are not an issue, so you can use cheaper/less compact fuel-cell designs there.
I’m an ev engineer and I’m betting on Lucid. Their motor/drivetrain is the most efficient. Tesla’s current draw is so high that you can’t drive them around all day with a lead foot unless you charge it a lot. When I found out Lucid is using the very same thing I’ve been working on I became an investor!
Who can say against Munro? But today most hydrogen are bi-product when producing Oil. So if the Japanese and others want us to use it, it has to be labelled, Green or Crude produced. Oil should be used for a lot of other stuff then burning up n your car. Just take a look around your room you are sitting in now....and that plastic you have can be re-used. VW and the others have not yet spent 15 years like Tesla Inc on how the electric motor should be assembled nor the battery. Tesla Inc has a large lead, via patents and years. So for many years to come all other cars will go less and use more electrons. Not to mention the charging stations, which Tesla Inc also have an advantage.
Or do work, or read a book, or have sex, or just sleep (something some Tesla owners are already doing, recklessly). Point is that that dead time will not be dead anymore.
These interviews are a friggin blast....waiting for the next one(s)! Sandy and the Californian-Russian guy's conversation are awesome! Love America because they both exist; these two guys make hope spring eternally. P.S. Russian colonists where in California (1732) before the English; so they definitely belong here. Only the indigenous folks and Spaniards claim seniority ...j
Great Interview. I would like to hear more of Sandy Munro and his thought on hydrogen. I have wish to wait for hydrogen. I don't know if my old clunker will make it so I may need to get an electric or very efficient gas in between but I lean to hydrogen.
I’m an ev engineer with 16 years designing electric vehicles. I like the Lucid the most and yes I’m an investor. It’s the most efficient design I’ve seen almost mimicking the work I’ve done. I don’t think batteries will be an issue as they supply’s increase and battery tech gets better. IBM I predict will be the winner of the battery wars.
Excellent conversation. Thank you both. Can’t wait until your next meet with Mr Munro, he’s an automotive God and hey you’re questions were very impressive. You Gus got me thinking it may be time to sell my i3REX....
@@danmoyer4650 I hadn't heard of Beta-10 so I did a quick google search and the first video that popped up is from a channel called Dirty Tesla wherein he shows multiple mistakes from the auto-pilot. Level 5 means you get in the car, fall asleep, and wake up at your destination. Tesla doesn't have level 5, or anything close to it. But that's not a slight on Tesla, because nobody has anything close to level 5.
But he is exactly correct that anything level 4-5 isn't possible yet until we have a lot more deaths that work through the courts to work out who gets sued and/or pays. That will be several more years in the making if not ten. We still have DOT rules in the US from 1950's preventing modern lighting, side cameras instead of reflective mirrors, etc. America is decades behind the rest of the world in many ways.
Sandy makes a huge, massive, excellent point. Established automakers are dragging 100 years or more history along with them. It is like the executives at a huge company like AT&T, IBM, etc. pulling all the employees together and telling them that they must be just like Netflix, Google, Tesla, etc. Impossible. A 100 year old company with an existing company base, shareholders, pension plans, etc. will never be like a start-up funded by venture capital that has no pressure to be profitable while in the growth phase. This is exactly what we have been hearing at the big corporation where I work. Everyone must be Agile, innovative and move quickly. But we must maintain 5 nines of reliability on our decades old products, cut our budget year-over-year, and maintain profit margins.
Sandy going on about hydrogen always makes me so sad. He is so smart and so knowledgeable and yet he's still subscribing to this hydrogen fallacy. What's worse is he's been talking about this since he started TH-cam, he must have received feedback that debunks hydrogen. Which means he chose to ignore it. This is very uncharacteristic for Sandy. "It's the most abundant element in the universe" - this non-argument has to just die.
GREAT SHOW ALEX!!!! Positive that Honda & Toyota are scrambling to make sure they have an EV in the game within 18months max. What's crazy to me is that it took a decade for EVERYONE to WAKE UP and get serious about EVs. Thank you Mr.Munro for reminding us all that Hydrogen is the only truly clean technology. Agree on ID4, but Nissan & Hyundai will be in that race.
Other automakers will reach the magic range number, but if Tesla achieves their goals of mastering manufacturing, then Tesla will almost certainly always be the cheapest and thus best value for money.
I don 't care what else you take into consideration, it is PRICE! that matters most to me and people in my income bracket! If I could get an EV that gives only half of what TESLA gives but costs half as much I would but that over anything else. PRICE, PRICE, PRICE!
C'mon man, Sandy's old and experienced and has a wealth of knowledge. I don't agree with him all the time but I at least can give him enough respect to allow him to meander some. Alex does an excellent job of politely keeping things topical, and he and Sandy are different kinds of people and they obviously show respect to each other. We should all act so.
@@BillyHarvey You're right, that comment was uncalled for. Sandy is probably my age and has managed to adapt his career from ICE to EV, has founded a business, and is a budding TH-cam personality as well. Kudos to him!
Looking forwarding to see your video with Sandy about Hydro cars. I do also belive that H is a dead donkey when it comes to cars. Q to Sandy: What to do with production of Hydrogen? Over 90% of production is from cracking natural gass. They take H and release the CO2 in to the air. People won’t by H from electrolysis when the price is 2-5X of H from gass.
It still seems range is the first concern for the folks I talk to about BEV's. The quick shot of the empty rear tub (@ 13:50) made me wonder, how much more battery would fit in that back area, and could an aftermarket company make a "range extender" pack that could somewhat easily attach to the Tesla factory battery?
Diminishing returns. The range race is about over. Nobody needs more than 300 real miles. That's fine for long distance assuming you have a fast charge rate and after that long on the road you need a 15 minute break just for safety. Anything more than that and you have this huge, heavy, expensive battery pack that you are lugging around every day on your 25 mile commute.
@@user-RCST Not really arguing as none of us are informed enough about the topics. Just expressing opinions. Although at least Sandy has immensely more industry knowledge and gets to talk to the engineers and R&D folks. I do look forward to this decade to see what shakes out!
The most powerful advertising is word of mouth and word of Twitter combined. If 10 Americans buy Chinese cars in one month and are surprisingly pleased with their purchase, at least 100,000 Americans will have that information within a week, 10,000,000 within 2 months, and GM and Ford will be effectively out of business in 2 years max.
What do you have on all these people that somehow agree to come on to your channel 😂
Some J.Edgar Hoover type ‘files’ 😉
I hold my journalistic integrity to a high standard and I treat other people in the industry with respect. Something that is missing with most Tesla and electric car TH-camrs unfortunately
@@EforElectric but who will buy from China after they worked with the DNC to release the DNC China virus on the world??
@@chtomlin Who will buy from the US other than Tesla when it turns out it was the US who unleashed the virus in the first place? Two can play that game !
@@leeramer171 well you don't play that game very well, lol. I said DNC China virus from the start, so admitted that the evil side of our country was involved. Just glad you realize this was released on the world by evil people protecting and increasing their power.
@@chtomlin c'mon man, stop that conspiracy rubbish...
You have gold here - repeated interviews with Sandy. I love getting his insights and knowledge, and you have a good insights on what to ask. You do an interview right in two ways. IMHO two things make a good interviewer. 1) Know the intelligent questions to ask. 2) Sit back, shut up, and let the expert talk and range freely in his answer. A fair amount of mainstream interviewers can do the 1st, but far too few do the 2nd. And when you do interject, it's always in a useful way. So thanks!
My two cents: There's plenty of room in the EV market for a car with level 3 self-driving, a 300 mile range, and only the interior features and electronic extras of a mid-priced Chevy or Toyota. People carry around their own entertainment anyway, all a car needs is Bluetooth and plenty of charger ports for the family.
Congrats on 100K , well deserved - I like the straight up - no BS approach to your commentary - helps us to navigate all the fluff and get to what really matters. Cheers 🥂
Do you guys think Ford's one billion EV investment in Cologne is a real alternative challenge to Tesla Giga Berlin?
@ 22:00 - Sandy. HFC has been in development since the 1950's. Please explain how the manufacture of Hydrogen fuel cell is more efficient (& environmentally sound) than just using electricity to directly charge a battery?
Gasoline is unsafe enough, Hydrogen is more explosive & needs to be compressed. It also seeps through most containers & turns metals brittle. How is the massive infrastructure required going to be safe let alone economical?
Sandy is starting to sound and act like sleepy Joe Biden. Hydrogen fuel cell may have its place but not in consumer vehicles..
I hope Toyota doesn't try to convice governments that Hydrogen Fuel is the way to go. I know Toyota has spent billions on developing cars for this method and they want to see a return in their investment.. Lets hope all the other automakers jump on electric soon so there will be no need for Hydrogen Fuel.
@@mamadouaziza2536 - Apparently, Mamadou, you not aware that "sleepy Joe" beat your boy, Trump's ass in the election and is now the POTUS. I don't know why you felt you had to inject your delusional politics into this totally non-political discussion.
@@danmoyer4650
Trump is not my boy and I don't support him.
I was just making a reference to Joe Biden and Sandy because they both stutter on their words and thoughts and are slow..
Does not need to be hydrogen, you can also use methane fuel cells. Instantly wipes out the storage and transportation problems.
The benefit is that you can refuel really quickly. Ideally you would have like 20 kWh battery for everyday driving and a fuel cell range extender for longer trips.
But mostly I see fuel cells being used in things like camper vans that get used very seldom but then for a really long distance.
And what do the 1950s have to do with that? Do you know how long batteries existed before they were mass marketed as an energy source in cars?
I think Sandy is wrong about H2-cars. The production is to inefficient and that is what matter. Just like LPG-tanks in cars people won't like it. And as Alex mentioned: you can't charge at home!
H2 is a hard call . . . for years some technically brilliant people have been throwing cold water on the notion that that H2 production/storage/distribution can be a viable option ( E.Musk & Don Lancaster come to mind ) but to have the big Japanese players putting major skin in the game has to give on pause to wonder what do they know/think . . . .
In Europe, they are removing H2 stations and installing Fast Chargers for EVs. The EV business is more reliable for investors. A fast charger is cheaper, easier and safer and there is plenty of EVs in the market right now. There is no point to invest in an H2 station while all the cars passing are EVs, because there is no fuel-cell car available in the market, well there are... but you can't buy them, and they are really expensive in comparison with EVs
Agreed, H2 (AKA "Fool Cells") are better than ICE, but worse than BEV until the energy to create the H2 is virtually free. Maybe for VTOL flying vehicles.
So it’s VHS vs Betamax. The Japanese need to learn from their past and get pornstars in those Hydrogen cars before it’s too late!
It's a fool cell, but it isn't as dumb as ICE.
Besides transport we're moving towards a fully sustainable green grid.
Currently wind and solar are the cheapest power plants. A grid that produces sufficiently on the worst days (no sun or wind) will have massive overproduction the rest of the year, aka superpower, at zero extra cost. Given the foreseeable battery constraints, hydrogen isn't a bad way to store this free superpower.
The size of the opportunity for H2 mostly depends on when battery production will meet demand.
If we'd have all the batteries we'd ever wanted right now, we'd only be considering H2 for the niche applications where it's technically superior, like VTOL and long range freight vehicles where range to weight matters most.
But we don't, so H2 is more viable than most of us would think.
I can charge a BEV at home...can I refill a hydrogen fuel cell at home? Hydrogen makes sense (to me) for electric aircraft (perhaps), but I can't see it ever becoming as attractive as a battery for a privately owned automobile.
The bad fuel problem will keep small cars from using fuel cells. anyone that has gotten water in there gas knows that bad fuel can be a problem. bad electric can also be a problem, but it won't wreck the most expensive part of the car.
I completely agree. For the general public consumer, BEV is the best option. Even though some would argue that the hydrogen station would allow for them to keep their 'trip to the gas station' mentality and make it easier to transition, I think that is just said because the general public has not been educated (marketing needed) on the benefit of not having to do that anymore. The only real advantage of hydrogen (for now at least) is the quick refueling capability. For long trips charging a BEV adds a lot of time, but can be used wisely if planned (such as stopping to eat), but if you are in a hurry that doesn't really work well. Hydrogen I think would be the very best option for commercial transport vehicles, where they need to cross a very large distance in a very specific timeframe in order to get paid. Having to just use a hydrogen pump to refuel similar to a diesel pump will help them transition and keep their targets intact without much change in behavior (just need the refueling infrastructure for this).
@@chriscalvert4423 Agreed. That is why Airbus already presented their vision of hydrogen powered aircraft. Once we get those up and running, then there are only ships remaining.
I mean it's somewhat possible considering all you need is water and electricity, but the pressurizing would certainly make it extremely challenging.
Hydrogen could be more popular for commercial and fleet operators.
In my experience BEV refuelling at home ( for those who have parking facility /garage at home ) is way more convenient than going to petrol pump or hydrogen pump.
Home charging and one pedal driving are such underrated feature of BEVs.
I think Sandy is great and accurate on anything but his support and praise of Hydrogen ABSOLUTELY MAKES NO SENSE. It fails in so many ways. From cost and difficulty to building fueling infrastructure, to inefficiencies, wasted energy to produce and transport to fueling stations. To dangers from leakage and explosion risk in accidents. To Tanks in cars taking up larger spaces and cutting down on storage in vehicle. To lack of ability to fuel and home and depend on stations just like gasoline. In addition to aforementioned having to transport to fueling station over road with trucks. It is doomed to fail. Hyrdogen vehicles are just electric vehicles with a smaller battery. Nothing more than a plug in hybrid with both battery and gas/hydrogen systems in it taking up more space with more to go wrong.
Fuell cells are dumb. Why would I pay 3 x times and go to a station? When I have a PV at home and drive for free?
You can generate hydrogen for free at home using energy from solar panels and generate hydrogen all day when you are at work. What is dumb about it ? You car fuel your car in 1-2 minutes when you will be back from work (when the sun does not shine on the panels to generate enough to charge the car). Or at any time.
@@wyrazowfkp which system for what price, pls.
@@wyrazowfkp Can you buy it at HomeDepot yet?
@@clu4u Can you buy a wall 240V charger there ?
@@wyrazowfkp Sure, it’s actually 220v...
I used to work for one of "the big three", and Sandy is 100% right. The legacy OEMs are still in denial. The move to EVs is more about Tesla's stock price than it is a change of heart. Their whole model of doing business (with dealer networks making money on service) are ill suited to an EV world. Most of them are on borrowed time.
J.P.M., Your observation doesn't surprise me. When Munro say they are wishing for the old days to come back it's history repeating itself. Back in the seventies they kept pushing big cars because they thought those little "fer'n" cars were going to dry up and blow away.
@@men2dewy You mean big cars like Gremlin, Pinto, Vega, Mustang II ? :D That were the compact class attack of US manufacturers that started in 1970 .... then it followed by Dodge Omni, Ford Escort, Festiva but such small cars did not sold in big numbers ....
@@wyrazowfkp That's what I'm talking about. Detroit built those cars kicking and screaming.
Hydrogen for planes looks sensible to me, not for cars
You only need to have hydrogen stations at airports, more simpler way of distribution.
Right. The big question about using fuel cells for planes is that fuel cells currently have a poor power density, but Toyota is improving that, and you can have auxiliary high power batteries for vertical takeoffs & landings.
I'm iffy on hydrogen as a fuel even for long-range aircraft due to how low-density it is, but methane fuel cell setups are also a viable option, as long as your fuel cell can handle carbon monoxide from the onboard steam reformer.
I agree.. 2 years ago I would have said for trucking also but then Nikola happen sooooooooo
Planes and ships are the ideal application for fuel cells.
Less vibration (which drastically shortens the lifespan of fuel cell stacks) and a steady load (so no need for large buffer batteries).
The load profile and environmental conditions in cars, trucks and locomotives are poorly suited for FCs.
GM super cruise was rated higher than Tesla FSD and Ford was right behind Tesla. GM and Ford actually allow hands free driving.
LOL, on premapped streets. Teslas don't need that. Huge difference.
@@j.metzger1730 See TFL test Mustang Mach E vs Tesla Model Y-- what premapped streets ? It uses cameras for lane markers and spotting other cars.
Alex great job halting the hydrogen conversation for another show. Sandy is not considering the power of consumers charging at home and having control. Always great programming!
Not everyone will charge at Home, or can charge them even if they wanted to. Charging at home is also going to get a lot more expensive as more investment will need to be put into the grid.
Exactly, why choose an option back to having to pay at the pump (fuel or hydrogen) when you can charge for fraction of the cost at home...
@@andrewmeehan6151 it’s called solar....
@@blaccsnow I think you will find the opposite will be true. Assuming people will have solar and that it will be able to produce what they need might prove to be incorrect. It is a lot easier to fill a car up and be good for a week or two than to charge all the time.
What is the problem in having solar panels -> use the power at day to do the electrolisys of water and store hydrogen -> and then tank it when you get back home on late afternoon, when your solar charging is not working or barely working ? What is the point of charging at home when you charge at night from fossil fuels ?
When you think it’s Munro Live, but actually it’s E for Electric - pleasantly surprised! 😁
Great talk with lots of details for the future of EV's and more. Thanks
Sandy really hits the nail on the head when he talks about psychology. The reality is most electric car buyers have no interest in buying a Ford or VW. So the challenge it seems for legacy auto makers is turning their current customers who are buying ICE vehicles into electrical buyers without losing them to Tesla or -they actually do want electric car.
Ford sales guy: hey Mr. Buyer, have you considered the new mustang electric car?!
Buyer: electric?! No, I had not considered buying an electric car.
Sales guy: you should, it’s the future!
Buyer: OK, I’ll give it some thought.
Buyer goes home and discuss with his wife who mentions she really likes the Tesla model Y. One of her friends just got one after all and can’t stop raving about it.
Tesla makes another sale.
I really hope that the legacy auto makers (the American ones anyways) figure this out but they have a very long road to hoe.
Except Tesla is a niche vehicle for early EV adopters. Four models all basically the same. Let's see if they can catch up to the legacy manufacturers as the CUV's, minivans, real pickups (i.e. the design form that's been around since 1940's), and the other models that people buy because it is what they need for their family or work through the different stages in life. But it's possible some people could have a Tesla on one side of their garage if they come out with a model that is compelling for what any particular individual needs. Personally, Tesla does not have or announced a model that I would buy yet. There are so many brands and dozens of different models and types of vehicles because no single company can produce what everyone needs in life.
@@davidmccarthy6061 you are preaching to the choir. I plan to replace my Lexus GX 470 with a cybertruck as soon as possible. That will then remain parked in my garage next to our Toyota Sienna minivan until Tesla comes up with a vehicle that will replace it as well.
I'm hoping the Hyundai Ionic 5 will get here this year!
For once I disagree, hydrogen is dead. The economics don’t work.
It works great for the gas and oil industry due to the immense amount of energy it takes to produce hydrogen. All it takes is the lobbyist to drop off briefcases full of cash in D.C.
Economics didn’t work for electric either several years ago but innovation, mass production, etc. are making it happen.
@@davidmccarthy6061 this guy gets it.
If gas never existed and we started building hydrogen cars first and only, then maybe it could make sense. But at this point you're building up the equivalent of an entire gasoline infrastructure with VERY few benefits over either gas or electric.
Gonna depend on the cost of the hydrogen. If it miraculously drops in price, there will be potential, but if it comes anywhere near the current cost per distance as fossil fuels then yep, its dead on arrival for consumers.
If my home solar can EFFICIENTLY generate and store hydrogen with my excess power so I can fill the tank when I get home from work, then you might just have a paradigm shift, but I can't see that happening in the next 20 years. Tesla HydrogenWall ain't about to happen :(
Tesla Model Y will outsell everything by itself.
Try to outsell Ford F series pickup :D Compare the sale numbers :D Quick reality check
Congrats on 100K 🎉🍾
Also because the Hummer is still an overkill, whereas the Rivian looks good and practical as well as being luxury!
It feels like with the Hummer, GM is chasing after the old Hummer customers that had a lot of money and wanted the image, never mind the poor fuel economy. Now it will still be for those that can afford one but at least they can feel good that it is electric.
One thing not mentioned is how current OEM dealerships and salesmen will sell EV's knowing that they won't get the type of income from servicing them that they do from ICE vehicles. It's a change management challenge that the new EV manufactures won't have to deal with.
California taxpayers have funded tens of millions of dollars in subsidies to build hydrogen fueling stations, yet there are only 43 stations in the state which is not nearly enough;. Nearly all states have zero hydrogen fueling stations. The fuel cell technology isn't the limiting factor for hydrogen vehicles. The problem is the lack of fueling stations. It would require hundreds of billions dollars to build a good nationwide fueling infrastructure.
I think the US-centric view is really sleeping on Hyundai/Kia - they're going to progress in the EV market rapidly. Both have solid offerings already but this year they start unloading their next gen, pure EV platform products such as the Ioniq 5/6 etc (nothing like the existing Ioniq), they're taking it very seriously.
I think the Mustang Mach E will outsell both the Rivian and especially the ID4. Looks + legacy. F-150 and Cybertruck around the corner, many will wait for those
@@jacka7211 Are you sure? Why is that? Their production abilities are stronger than Tesla's
I'm surprised how little emphasis is placed on self driving and safety capabilities when comparing Tesla to other manufacturers. That's true for other evaluators as well as for Sandy. Tesla constantly collects a gigantic amount of real time data from their cars on the road and feeds it to their artifical intelligence software which in turn improves both safety and the robustness of their self driving capability.. I'm not aware of any other manufacturers doing this. Certainly not on this scale. That's a huge advantage.
Like the phantom braking! Several Tesla owners were talking about it. Not every one wants self driving! Why would you pay 10,000 dollars so you can your hands off the wheel and not pay attention to road conditions! Very dangerous for other people on the road.
It is evolving but nowhere near mature enough technology but perhaps in another 5 years they'll be near level 4-ish. They definitely have the low hanging fruit worked out but staying in a lane and seeing other cars is the easy part. I'd say it is currently about a 16 year old. You're past your learners permit but haven't yet experience enough surprises on the road to be able to handle those. Although it is way better than a boy in a Mustang V8. And we're all waiting on the court cases to establish who is at fault, the driver or Tesla's programming. Not to mention the ethical issue of an unavoidable crash; kill the occupants of your car or kill who you are running into? Right now it's the humans fault but we'll see how that changes in the future.
@@tbone9405 Realworld data shows Tesla autonomous driving is twice as safe as manual driving - and it gets better with time. Humans can be horrible drivers due to falling asleep, distractions like texting, and intoxication. Also seniors benefit as reflexes diminish.
As far as cost goes, a subscription is being considered so you would pay by the month instead of inclusion in the initial purchase. That's a trend in software in general. Also, getting a crashed car repaired could easily be more than the cost of the software not to mention physical injuries to occupants.
I always hear everyone talking about the Rivian R1T, along with me since I have put down my deposit for one. But not hearing anyone talk about the Lordstown Endurance. They are supposed to be in production this fall. Is there a reason?
Come on Sandy test the Ford Mach E!
Hydrogen is not simple... it takes more energy to produce than you get out of it... add to that the energy in chilling it down to store it (with out that you can’t effectively store it - it leaks at room temperature). It’s a staggering the inefficiency.
Electricity also takes more energy to produce than you get out of it ..... power lines transfer and change to low voltage loss is about 11%. Then you got the heat loss while charging the battery...
You don't have to store hydrogen in low temperatures only (as the liquid) -- there are new ways of storing hydrogen in room temperature that are being worked on (what freezer has the Mirai ? none ? ).
Shocked by his views on H2. Aside the woeful disadvantages with respect to cost (purchase price and fuel cost) and home refuelling, I cant see anyone spending a trillion on H2 fuelling stations when BEVs are everywhere and electric range is 400 mile +
How much does it take to charge the car for 400+ miles ? When highway driving with AC, and higher speed like 80-90 mph that is 200miles maybe.... and what about towing a trailer ?
How long does it take to refuel a H2 tank ? Home refueling easy -> solar panels -> electrolisys to generate hydrogen -> afternoon 5 minute refuel from a home tank...
@@wyrazowfkp that's a pretty significant set up for home refueling on H2. You may be able to generate the hydrogen but the other aspect is the safety factor. H2 is notoriously prone to exploding and I don't think most people would really be willing to take that chance at their home. Now, for fuelling at a station, that's the big advantage. As fast as fueling now is a minimal behaviour change for people. The issue for H2 on that end is the chicken and egg problem. Toyota would need to jumpstart it to make it viable.
@@wyrazowfkp (message to myself) this is going to be my very last message about H2 anywhere on social media. The yearning for H2 comes from people wanting to stick with the current method of refuelling a car. Ignoring the numerous downsides (car cost 2x battery when not subsidised, fuel cost 5x home charge, overall time, convenience most of the time) and the economic barrier which is literally a trillion dollar cost that no one is willing to pay , fuel costs and the first mover advantage of batteries freezing out H2. Car cos had their chance ten years ago with FCs and didn't take it. With a change in habits of refuelling when doing something else, which will become second nature it will soon seem bizarre to anyone that the idea of installing a potential bomb in your house and pay 3x the cost to refuel so that a handful of times a year you can save ten minutes on a refuel, is a good idea.
And that's it for me, I'm done arguing on this dead end.
@@Joe-lb8qn Don't argue if you completly don't get it :D And have wrong attitude
@@wyrazowfkp Refueling an H2 car with pressurized hydrogen, you are always at a constant risk of getting filled with shrapnel. No thanks
High pressure or cryogenic anything just won't work at the consumer level imho
In a first- principles sense, hydrogen is the lightest and most energy- dense element in the universe, as lithium is the lightest metal. Hydrogen burns cleanly. I can see where excess solar and wind power generation could pay for generating hydrogen. However, at this point Tesla's 4680 cells direct to structure with electric motors is too simple and elegant and efficient.
Hydrogen is energy dense for its weight but not its volume. In terms of volumetric energy density, hydrogen has about a quarter of the energy of gasoline. This means you need a tank 4x the size of a gasoline engine to get the same amount of energy. Sure it’s weight is less, but the size is an issue. And it needs to hold the hydrogen at very high pressures. And you have other issues like metal embrittlement with hydrogen. Just to clarify too, you don’t burn hydrogen in a fuel cell.
@@chris12456 yes; I know all that.
Where do you get hydrogen (H2) in its natural form? I’d rather get energy from the sun (solar panels) than break down H2O and transport it all over the country
@@martinjackson909 hydrogen obviously has disadvantages; perhaps in the future hurdles will be overcome.
@@jamesengland7461 the first principles and basic fundamentals won’t change even with technological improvement
The legacy manufacturers are saddled with dealers. In my experience, the dealers hide the few electric vihivles they have at the back of their lots and their salesman dissuade you from buying one. There's no routine maintenance profit for the dealer with electric vehicles. The legacy manufacturers can succeed if they sell directly to the consumer.
What Tesla lacks, and Sandy points out partially in the most recent video on his channel, Is industry people who know how to design for manufacturability. He is tearing down a latest version Model 3 and finding many areas of the body that are poorly engineered. This is largely why Tesla continues to have fit issues with doors and panels. These problems are likely to get worse as the cars age.
What Sandy doesn't mention, and it may not be important to him. is the styling and material choices Tesla makes. Simply watching experienced EV reviewers seeing the Taycan, Polestar 2, and Mach E for the first time and seeing their visceral reaction to these vehicles, and the way they universally say "better than Tesla" tells an important story. Putting the spec sheet aside most car purchases are made based on emotion. What someone thinks of a car comes from the way it looks, the styling of the interior, the materials used, and how it makes them feel. No existing OEM would tolerate a CEO smoking marijuana on camera, being convicted of stock manipulation by the SEC, Calling fandom people pedophiles, or recommending unproven and ultimately useless medications (just to mane a few incidents). These things may not be a big deal to Tesla's devoted fans but they have absolutely colored the public perception of the brand. That Tesla has disbanded its small PR/media department is a hopelessly immature move given Tesla's image with the average consumer may well be its greatest challenge.
Sandy is right that it is legal teams holding up autopilot. This was the obvious outcome from the start. Accidents will inevitably happen. When a driver is at fault in a fatal or injury crash there may be criminal charges but more significantly in this case there will always be civil liability. Individuals carry insurance and settlements are usually limited to what an individual may reasonably be able to pay. There is no point in getting a $5billion judgment against a warehouse worker. If the driver, however, was a team of programmers working for a multibillion dollar corporation the court case will be quite different. See what the lawyers call "deep pockets." Simply look back at the vehicle fire death judgments in decades past won against GM and Ford. One day autopilot will be forced to choose whether to kill a child on the sidewalk or the driver of the car. In either case Tesla is going to get sued and it will be ugly. No insurance company is going to be willing to cover that. I see no solution to this problem and, as I said, it was obvious from the start.
For me personally I find the cars gimmicky and cheap looking for the price. I realise the touch screen is primarily there to cut costs. It eliminates countless switches and wires but is a cumbersome way to control a vehicle, especially while driving. The novelty is already wearing off. Note customers and reviewers complaining about the number of touch screens in new non-Teslas, and how everybody likes Ford's volume knob.
With all the advantages Tesla has it is extremely frustrating to me to see them fail to take the business seriously. Fans love the cars warts and all. Tesla isn't even on the leader board in Europe now that they face competition. That's certainly why Musk just cut the base Model 3 price by $4,000. Buying market share is not the best way to boost profitability. Today that competition is coming toward the US. Tesla needs to wake up.
@ Bill Kerr Elon Musk is a man on a mission and that is in a world that we can thrive and live in without choking to death on our own pollution you seem to be the most negative person on the planet and oblivious to the goals at hand Tesla's very existence is about providing cheaper greener cleaner vehicles to the masses and they don't buy thier market share as you are suggesting and unlike you he is a realist ,he may not be perfect and contradictory at times but he puts his heart and soul into what he believes is ethically correct and good for society ,I am one of many who believe and trust in his judgement he is without doubt the best thing to come out of America to make the whole world wake up and take notice for decades and good on him, he is a game changer who wants to make a difference to the planet period!!!
@@iandawson9945 I am very much a realist and don't buy in to emotional content. I do worry that Musk's inevitable fall from grace will damage the whole EV revolution he put into motion.
Blind devotion is a religion, not realism.
Tesla is the only auto startup to survive the “financial valley of death” going from losing money on one low volume car to making money on higher volumes and multiple models. And even if you could do all of the above there is the problem of getting customers. Without buyers, it would be a total DISASTER . The startups that do not have the money to lose $10 billion are going the sub-contractor route, like Fisher.
12$ per kg of liquid hydrogen... no thanks
Lee Tran
"12$ per kg of liquid hydrogen... no thanks"
He's talking about the future. The first CD players were $1200. Are you new to how technology works?
@@SamIAm-kz4hg in Australia, there is a company produce Hydrogen for 20 years... 12$ is the lowest they can go :). As a super cheap investor, I'm waiting for 1$ per kg. then I will go and buy a Toyota Mirai
Ask hydrogen vehicle owners how much hydrogen they lose every day when the vehicle has to vent it out because the hydrogen in the tank was getting too warm
@@allgoo1990 😹😹
Sandy, I don't see the big gas guzzler companies.. GM has an history of electronic problems in their ICE vehicles (I have owned several). The psychological issue I have, can I trust GM with an EV (Bolt included)? I am a consumer (not an engineer). My concern is based on ownership. A Rivian teardown would interest me more.
I think Sandy grossly underestimates the dishonestly and amorality of the VW execs. This was not a “little bit of cheating” - it was massive, for a decade, and demonstrably killed people due to excessive emissions.
... and it was a common practice in the automotive industry. I'm not trying to defend VW here, but other manufacturers (GM, Toyota, Ford, Crysler, Honda, Renault, Jeep, Caterpillar, Cummins, Mack, Volvo, ...) were caught doing exactly the same.
this channel and sandy are amazing . keep up the good work guys.
Nice conversation - Sandy's always worth listening to.
Love sandy but he’s wrong about hydrogen.
Nope, batteries are dumb when you really think about it. Too heavy and expensive.
@@andrewmeehan6151 you can do the same with hydrogen, plus I don’t think hydrogen will be viable for cars, vtol, and stuff like that sure!
@@harsimranbansal5355 For me an EV is a nonstarter simply because i got no wheres to plug in. Garage is full of stuff
@@andrewmeehan6151 Have you looked up how much hydrogen cars weigh? in most cases they are about the same weight and sometimes weigh more than the equivalent electric car. Also hydrogen cars are electric cars just more costly and more complex. The drive train is also a lot bigger do to the fuel cell and the hydrogen tank. Hydrogen cars need batteries and electric motors to operate. But on top of that they need the fuel cell as well as the hydrogen tank. So it's just an electric car with more complexity that adds weight cost and is less efficient all at the same time. Also, hydrogen is the most common element but it's not usually on its own. It's almost always bonded with other elements there for you need to use energy intensive processes to refine it like electrolysis. Therefore saying it's the most common element in the universe is a misleading statement. It makes it sound like its everywhere and easy to produce. When in reality, that is untrue. There are basically 0 advantages to hydrogen other than range and a truck load of negatives. There are so many reasons hydrogen doesn't make sense for cars and thats just the tip of the iceberg.
@@zoron9102 I respect your opinion but I'll contend that while hydrogen isn't ready for primetime yet, crazier things have happened before. If I assume for a moment that hydrogen is cheaper than gas, and a method is discovered to make it easier to produce there will be a huge market for it. I used to think that Sandy was just another Tesla fanboy, but it is clear to me now that he really does know what he is talking about and is completely unbiased. Hydrogen is likely a decade or more away, i'll give you that, but there is huge upside. I was reading that hydrogen cars might eventually have over 1,000 miles of range. Battery powered things are great, I have battery electric lawncare tools, and like them, but I am worried that like my IPhone, the battery will lose it's capacity after just a few years. Look at the recent car and driver review on the Model 3 and you will see that over time, the cars do lose significant battery range.
Alex@ The next time you see Sandy make him defend his statements about hydrogen, you are right it's DOA, he's flat out wrong. The only benefit of hydrogen is faster fueling and that's going away, you don't need to charge a car in 5 minutes, 10 to 15 minutes is fine and we are almost there. As charging curves improve over the next couple of years we'll be at a comfortable 10 minutes. With BEVs you only fast charge on road trips the rest of the time you charge at home which saves you not just the charging time but more importantly the trip to the fueling station. On a road trip you need to stop and pee every few hours anyway which you do while the car is charging. HEVs require just as many trips to the fueling station as gas cars except that the fueling stations are either non-existent or way less convenient than a gas station which are on every corner.
He made the statement about lugging around a battery which implies that a fuel cell is lighter. Look at the numbers for a Model 3 and the 2021 Mirai
Model 3 SR+ RWD, 3554 lbs
Model 3 LR AWD, 4036 lbs
2021 RWD Mirai, 4255-4335 lbs
A RWD Mirai is 200-300lbs heavier than an AWD Model 3. Where is this weight savings? People make the mistake of comparing the weight of hydrogen fuel to the weight of batteries, if you are going to make that comparison it should be the weight of hydrogen vs the weight difference of a charged battery vs and empty battery it's 0 for the battery. The real comparison is between the weight of the systems not the fuel and as you can see from above fuel cells offer zero benefits in a car.
Now lets look at the difference between the new Mirai and the Model 3. The Mirai is more expensive, it's performance is much worse, it has less space. In Doug DeMurro's review, you can see that the back seat is almost unusable, there is a fuel cell where the frunk should be and to top it off there is a hump going down the middle of the floor like an ICE car.
The cost of running a hydrogen car is prohibitively expensive. Toyota is hiding the cost by bundling it into the price of the car but the bottom line is making hydrogen and converting it back to electricity in a fuel cell has 1/3rd the efficiency of just transporting the electricity over power lines and putting it in a battery. That's 3X the fuel cost for an HEV vs a BEV.
Finally building a fueling network can't ever happen unless a spendthrift government want's to pay for it. BEVs only require 10% as many fast charge stations as gas stations because 90% of charging is done at home. HEVs require just as many stations as gas cars, that's a huge numbers. Hydrogen stations also cost much more than Superchargers, about 10X as much. A DC charger is a simple device and it's easier to site because it's safe. Hydrogen requires huge high pressure storage tanks and trucks with high pressure tanks to transport it, that's expensive and it's not going to get cheaper. Plus you have the chicken or the egg problem. Nobody is going to spend tens of billions building hydrogen stations until there are hydrogen cars on the road to use them. But no one can buy a hydrogen car until they they have a place to fuel it.
I was expecting Munro would say hydrogen is suitable for marine ships and long range freight trucks. But cars!!? With all my respect, I believe he got it wrong.
Well he did say VTOL. Weight is super important for that!
@@harsimranbansal5355 Agreed. On a side note, I would love to see hydrogen (clean hydrogen) use in marine ships and long range freight trucks because they are huge polluters.
@@100forms8 also ships have the advantage that weight and size are no issue, so you can use less compact fuel cell designs - which require less rare materials and therefore are cheaper to build.
Plus: there are less vibrations on ships, which severely limit the lifespan of fuel cells in road vehicles.
@@stephanweinberger Agree except vibration. I don't know if it is less or more but it's a lot of vibrations on the ship.
@@100forms8 It's a different type of vibration, lower frequency and typically no sudden changes/spikes like on the road. Much easier to isolate if necessary.
In Norway all new cars will be EV’s from 2025, in UK 2035, but either plug in hybrids or EV’s from 2030, just as examples!
Is the deadline so close for Norway ?
@@rsdwall466 yes, from 2025 no fuel engined cars can be sold
@@perpedersen6249 2025 is the date, but Norway is not “banning” sales of ICE cars. They just have a goal of 100% electric. If someone wants to buy an ICE car and is willing to pay the huge taxes, they still can after 2025. I think Norway sales will be 95-99% electric by 2025 and that will be considered a success by Norwegian people and their government.
@@georgepelton5645 as far as published they ban sales of pure petrol or diesel engines from 2025
Love the Munro episodes.
Excellent review!
I think Sandy is wrong about Hydrogen. So far we know we wont have any cheap way of producing cheap hydrogen and that exactly is the bottleneck for the forseeable future. So I am a bit surprise that he has that much hope for it. Seems strange considering his foresight so far.
Yeah I don't see hydrogen in passenger cars.
@@user-RCST Yeah and I don't even mention efficiency. Hydrogen would have to be very cheap as consumption is way too high . We know green hydrogen can be achieved with wind and solar overbuilding, though I am sure most understand this will take another decade, sadly. Even then hydrogen is way better used for industrial purposes replacing coal and fossil oil. There simply won't be as much supply meeting a possible demand from cars.
The largest problem legacy manufacturers will have is financial. They will need to sell at a profit while writing down stranded engine manufacturing assets. The ICE vehicles are dead and they just haven’t laid down yet.
Model Y RWD standard range will be the best seller is my pick for 2021
My pick is still Ford F-series pickup :D
Very insightful and interesting remarks by Sandy Munro. I too, was surprised about his views on hydrogen and await another discussion on that topic.
At 22:30 , he noted “I don’t want to carry a battery.”
“I don’t want to carry a battery.” - good luck finding a FCEV that don't has a battery :-)
Ok, the batteries are smaller, but with all the other stuff (pressure tanks, high pressure plumbing, fuel cells) a Mirai weighs just as much as a BEV of similar size (and has a smaller trunk than most).
I agree - can’t believe Sandy thinks hydrogen is the ultimate solution. Taking away my ability to charge (fuel) at home, for free, with solar? Never.
He does qualify it with "if they can figure out the technology". What if you could have a hydrolysis unit at home ? Just add water and solar ... the benefits of both home charging and instant refill on the road.
Personally I just don't like the thought of a highly pressurized hydrogen tank in my car or in my garage.
It's not like you're charging for free at home with solar. You are paying for the solar panels after all.
There is no problem in refuelling hydrogen at home -> it will be even more convinient ....
All the sunny day you are at work --> solar panels will generate energy used for electrolisys of water --> and store hydrogen in a small tank ....when you get back from work in the evening you will have a full tank of hydrogen to fuel the car or to use to heat the water/house .... much better than wasting all the power at day for nothing.
Very good content thank you Alex...willing to see you with 1M in future...congrats...
Your interviews with Sandy are fantastic! 👍
Sandy, (quoting Vokswagen) says, "We're going to pump out EVs like there's no tomorrow."
I think maybe what he meant was, "We're going to pump out EVs like there is a tomorrow."
Actually that’s the original wording !
Nice hat. EVs are coming faster than anyone except us expects....Thank you for helping us see all the other EVs..out there
Great insight. Great production quality of this video.
what is the average lifespan of the batteries inn these electric cars? and cost to replace
Technology advantage is not as important as cost advantage
An example is CATL iron phosphate batteries. They are far worse than what tesla currently uses so why are they moving to the inferior iron phosphate batteries?
Well it's simple cost advantage is more important than technology advantages
This is even true in your daily life
When you buy a laptop what is your consideration? To get the absolute fastest CPU fastest RAM fastest Hard drive fastest everything or to get an affordable package?
Cost per unit of results
Sandy shocked me too with that statement about hydrogen cars. What do we not know yet?? Is Toyota hiding something?
Nothing. Hydrogen for consumer cars is DOA.
@@davidmccarthy6061 With BEVs making up less than 1% of the world's car, you can't technically knock out any other technology yet and that includes hydrogen. As much as I don't like it, there may be things we don't know about it
@@Joda30088 Very true but I'll remain very skeptical. But I'm not smart enough to imagine someone overcoming its limitations in time to overcome the massive investment in battery technology. We'll see.
Hugely interesting discussion Alex/Sandy - REALLY enjoyed all of this show. Great Job! 👏
CONGRATS ON 100K SUBS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The saviour for hydrogen vehicles I think is going to come from the Military and it is nothing at all about going Green.
Probably joining to many dotted lines than is wise, I expect we will see small transportable nuclear reactors transforming water into hydrogen to power the military anywhere in the world. Quick to fuel and only needs water which they must transport anyway to make more, it all makes logistics that much easier and a big tactical advantage over petrol & diesel.
I say hydrogen but in reality battery / hydrogen hybrids.
Just an opinion.
For the majority of cars though I think battery power still has too many advantages over hydrogen, especially as more homes get solar and storage batteries.
Nuclear is in fact all about going green: the result of nuclear deployment will be less resources from nature, less waste to nature, less space stolen to nature, it will be the real decoupling of humans from nature, thanks to the high energy density, ultimately it will result in more prosperity for more humans.
Wind and solar are the opposite: far more usage of nature (to make the devices that harvest them; currently, they are made mostly in China to falsely show that they are affordable/sustainable, of course using/destroying a lot of nature, with little/no results in terms of human carbon footprint) for far less humans on the Hearth, due to the low energy density, ultimately it is the return to the middle age poverty, in which those in fact were the energy sources.
Awesome video buddy next time I change my car, I’m going for either the ID.4 or the Mercedes EQA!
Do you live in the US or Europe?
@@top10cars2 Hi I live in Britain
@@antonthompson7838 Cool! I hope the EQA will come to the US 🤞
@@antonthompson7838 why don't you try the Audi q4 etron..
Munro is so wrong on hydrogen. It's way harder to deal with compared to battery storage. Remember that hydrogen is not an energy source: it's a (poor) storage medium. Converting to and from hydrogen is inefficient.
Also, apart from the lower efficiency, all parts involved are more expensive and require more maintenance than batteries. Oh and btw. you need batteries anyways, because fuel cells cannot compensate for quick load changes (plus: you really don't want to pay for a fuel cell that can provide your car's peak power but is under-utilized 90% of the time). And did I mention that fuel cells in vehicles only last about 5000 to 10000 operating hours (because the thin membranes cannot handle vibrations all that well)? And the buffer batteries also have a shorter lifespan than in BEVs (because they are smaller and thus cycled more often).
Hydrogen makes sense in planes and ships, where the drive runs at a fairly constant load. Also, especially in ships weight and size are not an issue, so you can use cheaper/less compact fuel-cell designs there.
Hey! You broke 100K! Congrats!
Good on you Sandy. I enjoy hearing your visionary comments
WOW so much learning in this episode keep them coming. God bless you both
Why does everyone talk about competing with Tesla. The real competition is between ev's and ice cars. There is room for all!
I am searching for the part where sandy said "Nio already has better Bildquality than Tesla", was it this vid, anybody have a timestamp?
I’m an ev engineer and I’m betting on Lucid.
Their motor/drivetrain is the most efficient.
Tesla’s current draw is so high that you can’t drive them around all day with a lead foot unless you charge it a lot.
When I found out Lucid is using the very same thing I’ve been working on I became an investor!
That was a great talk!
When Sandy Munro talks, I listen.
Who can say against Munro? But today most hydrogen are bi-product when producing Oil. So if the Japanese and others want us to use it, it has to be labelled, Green or Crude produced. Oil should be used for a lot of other stuff then burning up n your car. Just take a look around your room you are sitting in now....and that plastic you have can be re-used. VW and the others have not yet spent 15 years like Tesla Inc on how the electric motor should be assembled nor the battery. Tesla Inc has a large lead, via patents and years. So for many years to come all other cars will go less and use more electrons. Not to mention the charging stations, which Tesla Inc also have an advantage.
ok now i'm super curious about sandy's view on hydrogen because i declared it long dead years ago too
It’s still in its infancy, but the potential is much better than with batteries.
The only reason he is developing Tesla autopilot is so that he can eat breakfast in the car
FSD = new meaning of party bus 😎
Or do work, or read a book, or have sex, or just sleep (something some Tesla owners are already doing, recklessly).
Point is that that dead time will not be dead anymore.
These interviews are a friggin blast....waiting for the next one(s)! Sandy and the Californian-Russian guy's conversation are awesome! Love America because they both exist; these two guys make hope spring eternally. P.S. Russian colonists where in California (1732) before the English; so they definitely belong here. Only the indigenous folks and Spaniards claim seniority ...j
Great Interview. I would like to hear more of Sandy Munro and his thought on hydrogen. I have wish to wait for hydrogen. I don't know if my old clunker will make it so I may need to get an electric or very efficient gas in between but I lean to hydrogen.
I’m an ev engineer with 16 years designing electric vehicles.
I like the Lucid the most and yes I’m an investor.
It’s the most efficient design I’ve seen almost mimicking the work I’ve done. I don’t think batteries will be an issue as they supply’s increase and battery tech gets better. IBM I predict will be the winner of the battery wars.
IBM ? ?
Excellent conversation. Thank you both. Can’t wait until your next meet with Mr Munro, he’s an automotive God and hey you’re questions were very impressive. You Gus got me thinking it may be time to sell my i3REX....
How is Sandy not more skeptical of Elon's level 5 claim?
Probably because he's been watching all the user-submitted vids on the FSD Beta-10.
@@danmoyer4650 I hadn't heard of Beta-10 so I did a quick google search and the first video that popped up is from a channel called Dirty Tesla wherein he shows multiple mistakes from the auto-pilot. Level 5 means you get in the car, fall asleep, and wake up at your destination. Tesla doesn't have level 5, or anything close to it. But that's not a slight on Tesla, because nobody has anything close to level 5.
But he is exactly correct that anything level 4-5 isn't possible yet until we have a lot more deaths that work through the courts to work out who gets sued and/or pays. That will be several more years in the making if not ten. We still have DOT rules in the US from 1950's preventing modern lighting, side cameras instead of reflective mirrors, etc. America is decades behind the rest of the world in many ways.
Sandy is the GOAT!👍🏻
RETIRED 76. Mr. Munro I like the way you think. GOOD VIDEO.
How can an informal, interesting conversation get any dislikes? This doesn't make sense
Sandy makes a huge, massive, excellent point. Established automakers are dragging 100 years or more history along with them. It is like the executives at a huge company like AT&T, IBM, etc. pulling all the employees together and telling them that they must be just like Netflix, Google, Tesla, etc. Impossible. A 100 year old company with an existing company base, shareholders, pension plans, etc. will never be like a start-up funded by venture capital that has no pressure to be profitable while in the growth phase. This is exactly what we have been hearing at the big corporation where I work. Everyone must be Agile, innovative and move quickly. But we must maintain 5 nines of reliability on our decades old products, cut our budget year-over-year, and maintain profit margins.
He just got a hair transplant a couple of weeks earlier, & it's already presentable? That's actually amazing.
Sandy going on about hydrogen always makes me so sad. He is so smart and so knowledgeable and yet he's still subscribing to this hydrogen fallacy. What's worse is he's been talking about this since he started TH-cam, he must have received feedback that debunks hydrogen. Which means he chose to ignore it. This is very uncharacteristic for Sandy.
"It's the most abundant element in the universe" - this non-argument has to just die.
GREAT SHOW ALEX!!!! Positive that Honda & Toyota are scrambling to make sure they have an EV in the game within 18months max. What's crazy to me is that it took a decade for EVERYONE to WAKE UP and get serious about EVs. Thank you Mr.Munro for reminding us all that Hydrogen is the only truly clean technology. Agree on ID4, but Nissan & Hyundai will be in that race.
Other automakers will reach the magic range number, but if Tesla achieves their goals of mastering manufacturing, then Tesla will almost certainly always be the cheapest and thus best value for money.
Great interview 👍
I don 't care what else you take into consideration, it is PRICE! that matters most to me and people in my income bracket! If I could get an EV that gives only half of what TESLA gives but costs half as much I would but that over anything else. PRICE, PRICE, PRICE!
For energy in energy out, electric car 60% efficient hydrogen 20% efficient.
Alex, congratulations on 100k subscribers! Also, kudos to you for articulating your questions so well. I wish that Sandy's responses were likewise.
C'mon man, Sandy's old and experienced and has a wealth of knowledge. I don't agree with him all the time but I at least can give him enough respect to allow him to meander some. Alex does an excellent job of politely keeping things topical, and he and Sandy are different kinds of people and they obviously show respect to each other. We should all act so.
@@BillyHarvey You're right, that comment was uncalled for. Sandy is probably my age and has managed to adapt his career from ICE to EV, has founded a business, and is a budding TH-cam personality as well. Kudos to him!
Looking forwarding to see your video with Sandy about Hydro cars. I do also belive that H is a dead donkey when it comes to cars.
Q to Sandy: What to do with production of Hydrogen?
Over 90% of production is from cracking natural gass. They take H and release the CO2 in to the air. People won’t by H from electrolysis when the price is 2-5X of H from gass.
Yes. I wish we didn't cut Sandy off when he started on Hydrogen. Looking forward to the hydrogen episode.
Great Job !!!
FORD does not think we they are going back to 1992.
How do you know you're not the automotive expert of automotive experts.
@@user-RCST Ohh no?
Yes you are right , but I do know a thing about FORD.
@@Mustangchef I mean I have family members that work for Ford.
Alex, Congratulations on 100k subscribers!
It still seems range is the first concern for the folks I talk to about BEV's. The quick shot of the empty rear tub (@ 13:50) made me wonder, how much more battery would fit in that back area, and could an aftermarket company make a "range extender" pack that could somewhat easily attach to the Tesla factory battery?
The more batteries you add the more expensive the car gets and Tesla wants to lower prices.
Diminishing returns. The range race is about over. Nobody needs more than 300 real miles. That's fine for long distance assuming you have a fast charge rate and after that long on the road you need a 15 minute break just for safety. Anything more than that and you have this huge, heavy, expensive battery pack that you are lugging around every day on your 25 mile commute.
@@davidmccarthy6061 that's not true a lot of people need more than that.
@@davidmccarthy6061 you're the same person I'm arguing with about full self-driving.
@@user-RCST Not really arguing as none of us are informed enough about the topics. Just expressing opinions. Although at least Sandy has immensely more industry knowledge and gets to talk to the engineers and R&D folks. I do look forward to this decade to see what shakes out!
The most powerful advertising is word of mouth and word of Twitter combined. If 10 Americans buy Chinese cars in one month and are surprisingly pleased with their purchase, at least 100,000 Americans will have that information within a week, 10,000,000 within 2 months, and GM and Ford will be effectively out of business in 2 years max.
SANDY, HAVE YOU HEARD OF THE QUANT 48VOLT? COULD THAT BE THE PARADIGM SHIFT?
Would be very interesting if you did a program on after sales service on EV’s