[sreeharipv]

Originally Posted by navpreet318

I have been saying it earlier and I would reiterate again that till the time we don't have standardized Battery packs which can just be swapped at a station like a petrol station, we won't see electric revolution happening.

This is not true. Battery is so big that it'll have far reaching effects in to what a manufacturer can do with design differentiation. This maybe possible for auto or even scooters. Battery swapping can't be the solution for cars. We already have cars that can do one day's worth of city taxi driving in one charge. We'll see adoption in this sector first because of the mammoth saving opportunity. Once cheaper 300 km electric cars that can be recharged to 80% in under 30 minutes are here, everyone will have electric cars. Nobody drives more than 300 km without breaks.

[dragracer567]

While on the subject, an interesting take from James May ........... while the electric car could be the answer for zero emission cars, hydrogen could be the answer to replace fossil fuels in boats, trains and even airplanes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2Ovn4REO2w

[superbad]

This is what happens when non technical graduates without an iota engineering understanding, study law & become supreme court judges. The time & stationery wasted "exploring" can be put to better use such as planning & building of charging stations for EVs.

[redeff]

I fail to see why this thread has turned into a bash up the Supreme Court thread. I'm a lawyer practicing in the Supreme Court and while I often have differing views from the court about a lot of things, I refuse to believe how debasing some of these comments are.



Why should Judges be bashed for being Arts graduates? The Supreme Court draws its judges mainly from the bar or the High Courts who in turn draw their judges from the state bars. We are not talking about bureaucrats here. We are talking about some of the brightest minds that are available to us. And yes, they can be removed from reality at times due to their insulation from the normal public.


What's wrong in asking the government to explore hydrogen as a fuel? The last month was my first Diwali in the NCR area and I for the first time experienced the 'gas chamber effect' myself. I see nothing wrong in the Supreme Court asking the government to explore any sort of alternative fuel that may reduce, negate or otherwise eliminate our emissions. Why attack the judiciary here? What have they said wrong? Are they suggesting something unheard of before? Is hydrogen as fuel not being explored as fuel? If Toyota in Japan can do it, why can't the India government? How do we assume that the time that is spent by the government is better invested in setting up electrical infrastructure? Are we going to bet our entire future as a country or a race on one single horse?



I see a lot of criticism in this thread for judges that are basically asking the government to explore more than one future technology to basically save our planet. I do not care about being banned from this forum, but seriously, I do not think that Team BHP has come down to this.


We should be lauding the Court and the government that is trying to do something about the environment. Not commenting on how their educational backgrounds causing them to not understand what they talk about.


Just on a note. I don't post here very often anymore. That being said my post is not an attack on this forum or any of its members directly or indirectly. Just a bit disappointed I guess. I saw a few brilliant posts in this thread both supporting or opposing hydrogen as a fuel source. Now that. That's what Team Bhp quality has always stood for in my head.

[Reinhard]

Originally Posted by redeff

I fail to see why this thread has turned into a bash up the Supreme Court thread. I'm a lawyer practicing in the Supreme Court and while I often have differing views from the court about a lot of things, I refuse to believe how debasing some of these comments are.

Why should Judges be bashed for being Arts graduates? The Supreme Court draws its judges mainly from the bar or the High Courts who in turn draw their judges from the state bars. We are not talking about bureaucrats here. We are talking about some of the brightest minds that are available to us. And yes, they can be removed from reality at times due to their insulation from the normal public.

+1
You are absolutely right here. Every person is an expert in their field & so are the judges. Absolutely fine in their opinions on an automotive item. If we wait for an automotive engineer (mechanical) to be a supreme court judge, we'll get judgments by the time the questioned technology is already obsolete. Every profession sure must be respected & so should be the professionals practicing it. Difference of opinion is welcome but unnecessarily questioning one's eligibility is a bit harsh indeed.

Originally Posted by redeff

I see a lot of criticism in this thread for judges that are basically asking the government to explore more than one future technology to basically save our planet.

Agreed, I have a slightly off topic but genuine doubt & no better than an SC lawyer to clarify it for me if you please.

So in India off late we see the courts (Supreme, High etc.) actually directing the government on items. The way I saw it, judiciary was supposed to give a "RIGHT or WRONG - then serve penalty if WRONG" rather than advisory counselling or directives. How does it work exactly? Or in this particular case, someone had filed a PIL asking for government to do this & the court gave a judgement in favour?

Sorry for

[redeff]

Originally Posted by Reinhard

+1

So in India off late we see the courts (Supreme, High etc.) actually directing the government on items. The way I saw it, judiciary was supposed to give a "RIGHT or WRONG - then serve penalty if WRONG" rather than advisory counselling or directives. How does it work exactly? Or in this particular case, someone had filed a PIL asking for government to do this & the court gave a judgement in favour?

Sorry for

More of a 'Shifting gears' conversation isn't this? That being said, to put it very simply, different courts have different functions. They also exercise powers in different manners and have a different set of rules regarding the exercise of those varied powers. The Supreme Court, simply put stands at the apex of the Judiciary. Beyond the normal adjudicatory powers, it also has other powers that helps it maintain the system of 'checks and balances' that is envisaged in the constitution.



Ofcourse, this is to put it simply. The actual nuances need not be gone into. The concept of "RIGHT or WRONG - then serve penalty if WRONG" is true for lower courts. (Lower courts are the courts below the High Court level).

[Thilak29]

Hydrogen in cars is difficult engineering problem, however is a great possibility for enabling self sustaining townships who can produce their own electricity for domestic use. Siemens has pioneered in this field and has some interesting solutions to offer.

Side note : When will our courts stop poking nose into subjects not in their realm of expertise ?

[landcruiser123]

Courts exercising more power aside, I think Hydrogen is the future. The cars are ready, the production technology is not. Remember how people laughed when they saw the Prius hybrid? It might take 50 years or longer for HEVs to reach the stage at which EVs are today.

Lithium and other metals are a limited resource, biomass is not. It will take universities and companies a few decades of research to produce Hydrogen efficiently from wet biomass. Once that is done, we should be running H2 powered cars.

[Reinhard]

Originally Posted by landcruiser123

Courts exercising more power aside, I think Hydrogen is the future. The cars are ready, the production technology is not. Remember how people laughed when they saw the Prius hybrid? It might take 50 years or longer for HEVs to reach the stage at which EVs are today.

Hydrogen extraction isn't a big hurdle at all. Technology for efficiently extracting Hydrogen already exists (and is in regular use). The biggest hurdle is storage and transportation.

Remember - we have basic petrol mopeds catching fire due to poor maintenance. Will you feel totally at peace when carrying your beloved family in a car that is also carrying a large quantity of one of the most unstable and combustible materials ever known? We take care of our vehicles - okay. Not all do. And we don't service our car ourselves every day. It goes for maintenance once or twice an year where a pretty uninterested 3rd party works on the car.

Risks with Hydrogen fuel are quite significant considering the volume of vehicles involved.

[Pam81]

As an engineer, I think & believe Hydrogen does have a place in the technological road map. EVs are a good stop gap, can't be sustainable in my opinion, particularly for countries like India. Unless, we run a super-efficient electricity grid with humongous installed capacity in 1000s of GW. Even today, we struggle in electrifying the entire country. Lots of states are still in deficit of required electric power versus allocated from the central grid.

People do talk a lot about the fast charging of battery tech. What we are forgetting is, fast charging needs tremendous amounts of electricity. Take simple example of a cell phone. Have you observed that a phone equipped with fast charger heats up a lot during charge? It's because of the heavy current it draws. Check the wattage specification of the charger, it's high rated. 10W normal charger charges your phone in 90 mins for 3000 mAH battery. A 35W charger can do in 30 mins. 25W extra electric power is needed. Now scale it for huge battery packs for cars, buses and trucks!

Without we make substantial investments in electricity generation & distribution, electric car revolution itself is still a distant dream for our nation. Hydrogen, for sure has even more tougher hurdles. But it's not impossible.

[suresh_gs]

Originally Posted by Pam81

As an engineer, I think & believe Hydrogen does have a place in the technological road map. EVs are a good stop gap, can't be sustainable in my opinion, particularly for countries like India. Unless, we run a super-efficient electricity grid with humongous installed capacity in 1000s of GW. Even today, we struggle in electrifying the entire country. Lots of states are still in deficit of required electric power versus allocated from the central grid.

People do talk a lot about the fast charging of battery tech. What we are forgetting is, fast charging needs tremendous amounts of electricity. Take simple example of a cell phone. Have you observed that a phone equipped with fast charger heats up a lot during charge? It's because of the heavy current it draws. Check the wattage specification of the charger, it's high rated. 10W normal charger charges your phone in 90 mins for 3000 mAH battery. A 35W charger can do in 30 mins. 25W extra electric power is needed. Now scale it for huge battery packs for cars, buses and trucks!

Without we make substantial investments in electricity generation & distribution, electric car revolution itself is still a distant dream for our nation. Hydrogen, for sure has even more tougher hurdles. But it's not impossible.

To begin with series hybrid can be thought of in addition to pure EV. In series hybrid, engine drives the generator which in turn powers the motors and then output is transferred to wheels. Motors are also powered by battery pack. Whenever the SOC of battery goes low, the engine will recharge the batteries. Cost wise will be more for series hybrid as IC engine (downsized) is involved in addition to battery pack but this can be worked out to begin with.

[KMT]

Posted in error. Pls delete.
I couldnt upload the appropriate attachment.
Apologies