Are hydrogen powered cars the future or the transition towards electric cars?

Hydrogen fuel cells have one major benefit over fully electric cars. You can fill them up in the same way you fill up your petrol or hybrid car. You don’t have to wait for them to charge.

The benefits probably end there though. They’re about half as efficient as fully electric, require a complicated process to create the highly pressurized hydrogen, which then needs to be transported around the world as petrol does. That doesn’t sound like an ideal solution.

The instant refilling is a huge benefit right now of course, but as battery technology improves over time, the situation won’t be clear cut. Hydrogen cars aren’t going to be mainstream any time soon, and in the meantime the world will be covered in fast charging stations, which will be constantly improving speeds. Not to mention the fact that the batteries themselves will increase dramatically in range. These advancements should render Hydrogen fuel cells as largely redundant.

The lack of infrastructure will ultimately hinder hydrogen adoption. Even though electric superchargers aren’t everywhere yet, everyone can charge their car at home whether it’s through a dedicated fast charger, or through the mains.

Even in a best case scenario in which Hyrdogen stations become commonplace worldwide, the production of the fuel and the fuel cells themselves become far more efficient, it will be hard to ever match pure EVs. But I’m excited to see how it pans out. Maybe they’ll prove me wrong.

I’m half impressed, half disappointed by Yamaha’s new R1

On one hand, the R1, and its fellow 2015 ultra-bikes like the Kawasaki H2 and the new Ducati Panigale are amazing feats of engineering that we should celebrate for pushing the boundarys of what’s possible. They’re exciting, make a lot of noise and go very fast…. So what disappoints me about them?

The first issue I have is that these bikes, particularly the R1 and most likely the H2 as well, are so powerful that they would be essentially uncontrollable without the extensive electronic rider aids. Some aids I think every bike should have. ABS and Traction Control are important. When you go too far beyond those, you wonder why you can’t just make a bike with less power, that you can actually ride without relying on electronics to keep you from crashing. I think you need to find a balance between rider aids and keeping the riding experience as pure as possible.

The second and more important issue I have is that motorcycle manufacturers are overly focused on one-upping each other in speed and performance. Taking their eyes off key matters such as pushing motorcycling as a real alternative to cars as a practical commuting solution for the masses, as well as improving their environmental credentials. The fact that most bikes still put out significantly more harmful gases than cars is unacceptable in my opinion, and something should be done. Electric bikes are on the way, and some of the current ones are already very nice machines. Motorcycle regulators have done a poor job in enforcing Euro regulations which has been much more aggressively done in the car industry. They are starting to catch up now, but it’s been far too long coming.

As far as marketing goes, Yamaha and others make great scooters, but they don’t talk about them enough. The bread and butter of the car industry is in practical hatchbacks, and the sports car market piggybacks off that success. Fiat sell a huge amount more cars than Ferrari do, and the motorcycle industry needs to take note, and fast.

Sports bikes can’t come first forever, or motorcycling will risk becoming irrelevant among the general public. Motorcycles account for around 1% of UK traffic, and that is simply nowhere near enough. As electric bikes and scooters come in and the battery technology improves, a big push should be made to get that percentage up to 5-10% in the medium to long term. It’s about time that motorcycling was marketed as something other than just a leisure pursuit.

Is it better to act as if you don’t care about climate change?

It’s pretty depressing when I talk to people, and every time we get onto the subject of things like driving, people have no interest or just don’t know anything about climate change, or at worst don’t care at all. “It’s someone else’s problem right? It doesn’t effect me.”

I understand that, but I find it hard to not care. Maybe it would be better if I acted like I didn’t, or at least not talk about it as much as I do. Not everyone knows what Tesla is, they aren’t going to buy a Nissan Leaf, even the BMW i8 isn’t going to change their opinion on hybrid cars. Maybe the best way environmentalists like me can hope to make a difference, is just by letting things go bad. If we don’t do anything, and we just leave it to the scientists and car manufacturers to keep working behind the scenes, in the meantime the general public will continue to use up our fuel resources. Before long they’ll have no choice but to make an effort to change their ways.

Will it be too late by that point? Is it already too late to reverse the damage that’s been done to our atmosphere? I don’t know, but what I do know is that every day that we continue as we are, the job is getting progressively more challenging.

Perhaps the recent reduction in oil prices can be a blessing in disguise. Maybe it’ll help to deplete the oil faster and put us on the right track quicker, albeit while doing more damage in the process.

Simply put, we should probably stop ramming the facts down peoples throats and instead just quietly do our bit and hope for the best going forward. It’s like the I’m a Mac, I’m a PC ads. By annoying your potential customers, you’re probably not getting the desired effect from your advertising. You’ve got to allow people to catch up on their own terms, however painfully slow that feels to us as technology fans and environmentalists.

One Thing I Don’t Understand About Downhill MTB

2012 Norco DH, Freeride, Trail, XC and 29er mo...
2012 Norco DH mountain bike (Photo credit: BikeRumor.com)

When you watch downhill, the world cup’s in particular where the courses tend to be the most technical and hard on the bikes, you often see guys losing a chain, having it jam or even break completely. It makes you wonder why they even run gears at all and don’t just go for a single-speed set-up.

The riders could try different gear ratios in practice and settle on one for the race. There don’t tend to be many pedalling sections in most courses anyway so you probably won’t lose much time even if you slightly miscalculate your gear. Plus, who has time to change gears when you’re hurtling down a mountainside trying desperately just to keep hold of the handlebars for 3 or so minutes?

By the time you actually find the right gear on your cassette you’re likely out of the pedal section and back into the technical parts or flat out downhill where your best bet is to tuck in tight and hold on.

This is true of FMB riders as well. It’s a gravity based sport so even though there are some pedalling sections in some courses, generally you don’t have to do much of it if you stay on course. I get why some tracks work better for short travel full suspension bikes instead of the generally preferred hard-tails but I can’t really ever see a situation where you would benefit from running gears. One brake is also probably enough for most FMB courses, but of course, not in downhill where you need two of the best brakes money can buy.

But to summarise, I want to see single-speeds in downhill racing. The bikes would be simpler, more durable and more beautiful too. If it’s not allowed in the technical rules currently, change it UCI.