And 'people with credentials' also believed in hydrogen cars and wide deployment of synfuels for automotive. There are lots of claims made over the last 20 years by people with credentials. But I guess you still believe in hydrogen cars so its probably not worth having this debate.
Wind and solar are replacing fossil fuels (or in the rare case of Germany, nuclear). Hydorgen cars by the time they could finally come about would be replacing already carbon free battery cars.
Hilariously enough is not only are you holding on to a relic of the past, you are also defending a technology that is far less energy efficient and is not even green, and wont be for many decades.
You can't just declare something progress because it has always been progress. Its simply a technology that has already been overtaken by something far better before it was ever deployed. That is really progress. What you are doing is declaring something the future and then holding on to it forever and claiming that its the only possible progress.
So in reality you are the one not actually looking to progress, but defending historical idea of progress.
The fundamental problem with batteries is that they're heavy, highly resource dependent, and take a very long time to recharge. This is not going to change unless you take extreme measure like battery swapping. Furthermore, as the world shifts towards SUV sized BEVs, it becomes its own environmental and societal menace. This is a doomed idea in the long-run.
The thing about fuel cell cars is that they are also EVs. They are basically the same idea as BEVs, just without the giant batteries. This gives us far greater flexibility. You can even envision the idea of plug-in fuel cell cars, eliminate pretty much any real arguments against them as a general idea. Everything can be shifted towards zero emissions just like BEVs.
And because FCEVs do not have the huge batteries of BEVs, they are fundamentally more sustainable. And if you are aware that they are also EVs, then they should eventually close whatever efficiency gap you imagine them having. Ensuring that the long-term world will be one dominated by FCEVs.
These are all simple and straightforward bits of reasoning. It does not take much effort to see that FCEVs are the future, and the only question is when. BEV fanatics like you are just spamming FUD against them, many of which are total red herrings. These are terrible arguments and all it does is undermine the credibility of BEVs. In fact, these are signs of a technology that is running out of steam, not a technology on the rise. If you need to lie to defend your business, then you are headed down the path of Reddit and Twitter, just waiting until some disruptive event drives you out of business.
You have a source from where you heard about it, but if you open up the link the person simply states this as fact. They do not back up their claim with any facts or sources, they simply say it.
The onus is not on me to provide counter evidence for an unsubstantiated claim. The onus is on the person making the claim to provide evidence backing it up.
No, that considered an appeal to authority.
As I said from the outset, you are free to present any counterevidence. Heck, even a person of similar expertise saying otherwise. Anything more than you denying it.
