Hydrogen is not a "source" of energy at all. It is a store of energy, much as petrol is. The energy has to come from somewhere, i.e. it has to have an actual source, and one of the possible options for what to do with that energy is to use it to create hydrogen. Unfortunately in practice hydrogen is quite difficult to store, or to carry about in a vehicle. It has to either (a) be compressed to an extremely high pressure, or (b) be cooled to an extremely low temperature, or (c) be kept in an extremely large volume container. Each of those three options is difficult and expensive to achieve, especially on a motorbike. All these real, fundamental, practical difficulties are of course totally ignored by folk who ramble on about hydrogen being the "fuel of the future". Starting from the assumption that a plentiful source of energy is available in the first place (which is true in e.g. Norway, but not in most places), another option for what to do with it is to use it to create liquid hydrocarbons like methanol or ethanol from air and water. These are compact ways to store energy, do not require cooling or compressing, keep indefinitely, and are easy to utilise by simply burning them in an internal combustion engine - whereupon the air and water are recovered.
There have been a number of developments for storing hydrogen, once you have split it off from wherever. https://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/hydrogen-storage-current-technology
I don't think anyone would find electric vehicles boring to drive or ride it's just they have little in the way character of ownership.
These documents essentially list problems and difficulties which would have to be solved - if it's even possible to solve them - before hydrogen vehicles would become viable. There are, of course, no solutions to any of the problems. At least, not yet.
Absolutely, and there is still the problem of where the hydrogen would come from. I think hydrogen is a great fuel in a number of very specific applications where cost is of little consequence but it is a long way from being a viable form of widespread public transport.
London transport are already running hydrogen fuel cell buses........they don't get the same level of "press" that EVs get but they are out there
An excellent application in a specialised niche market. If you want to force people out of their smelly cars in big cities you have to offer a clean alternative, but if everyone left their cars at home and took the bus how many extra busses would be needed ?
Random trivia but my old man has the world record for the most amount of laps of the m25 in 24 hours in a hydrogen car I believe it was ha ha
In the early days of the motor car a supply chain quickly established itself to supply the fuel, but it was stored sunshine that was cheap and abundant. Replacing hydrocarbon fuel on a small scale is easy but replacing it on a large scale is going to require a very large investment. I am sure it is possible but I am not sure the implications have been fully thought through, or if they have we are not being told about them.
One is being trialled but to date trials elsewhere have proven not as good as expected as they require clean air to operate. They also drive electric motors and not a conventional style engine.
prety sure they went to the expense of putting in a national grid. anyhoo, its all irrelevant because it will be sail boats you lot are travailing in. if indeed your allowed out the walled citys of the future because the duke of buccleuch will own any of the dry land that's left.
