Everyone talks about the impact of electric or hybrid cars but no one about hydrogen cars, an ecological alternative that can also promote sustainable mobility. Hydrogen cars Brands like Tesla and even Toyota are betting on electric or hybrid cars, but Honda directed its efforts towards hydrogen cars with the FCX Clarity, while Mazda also joined in with its RX8 model that runs on gasoline and hydrogen. In the case of Hyundai, not only did it opt for this type of car, it also decided to design a fuel cell, but what is the difference? The fuel cell car is not recharged through a plug, instead, it contains hydrogen tanks that mix this gas with oxygen to generate the propulsion that will allow the vehicle to move. Within this battery, oxygen and hydrogen are combined to generate electrical energy and water; Hydrogen cars only emit water vapor through the exhaust pipe. And the advantages? Honda shares that part of the advantages of hydrogen cars is that they take around five minutes, while electric cars can take up to 4 hours. “To fill the hydrogen tank, the same procedure is used as with traditional fuels: it is done through a hose, which remains sealed to the tank while the tank is refueled,” shares the brand. Another advantage is that this type of car has a greater autonomy, as in the case of the first generation of Hyundai's fuel cell that reached almost 430 km, while the second generation, with the Nexo, reaches km.
Disadvantages… As with the other car alternatives, there are still not enough charging centers. However, in countries such as Germany, plans are being made to install nearly 500 hydrogen stations that will have the capacity to supply 50,000 cars. Another possible disadvantage is the price. Hydrogen cars are more expensive to produce and therefore their price is higher in the market. Furthermore, the price of
Europe Cell Phone Number List hydrogen is not that economical and even exceeds traditional fuels. This is because the system and design of the vehicle requires a greater investment to produce them. One more disadvantage is that fuel cell models do not gain in efficiency compared to electric ones because the approved energy consumption to travel 100 km is greater in a hydrogen car than in an electric one. Joe Gagliano, head of infrastructure development at the California Fuel Cell Partnership, a public-private partnership to promote hydrogen fuel, notes that there are still some problems to solve because hydrogen is still unknown to most consumers. However, the hydrogen car can be a great alternative to promote sustainable mobility and position this car as another sustainable alternative.
One of the energy sources that pollutes the planet the most is coal, which is why Finland announced last year that the country would say goodbye to coal by 2030 and instead would increase the use of nuclear reactors to generate energy. However, Kimmo Tiilikainen, Minister of the Environment, went ahead and said that the ban on the use of fuel will be a year earlier than planned, that is, by 2029. According to El País, this measure is part of the future National Energy Plan for the next ten years, which is inspired by the bioeconomic strategy launched in 2014 and the commitment of other European countries against the threat of climate change. This is an objective of the country that responds to the political impulse in line with the Paris Agreement and the complex system of combined heat and electricity production plants intended to supply large urban centers. The fact that Finland is giving up coal means that 10% of energy will gradually be switched to other alternatives over the next ten years , at a rate of 2% each year. Coal represents 10% of Finnish energy. They intend to replace demand with nuclear energy. Tweet this sentence. Banned from using coal as energy by 2029 For the president of the energy panel of the Scientific Advisory Council of the European Academies, and professor of energy physics and advanced energy systems at Aalto University, Peter Lund, “this is an achievable goal. Finland has one of the highest carbon dioxide emissions per capita in Europe, so the decision is correct.