On Sun, 11 Apr 2021 12:28:55 +0100
Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sun, 11 Apr 2021 10:56:04 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 15:41:53 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
That matters for long distance lorries and buses for whom suitable
batteries
would be a ridiculous size, but for cars its not even an issue right now,
never mind as technology advances. Yes, they're maybe half a ton heavier
than an equivalent ICE car at most, but the vehicle size is the same, if
not a bit smaller.

Which is why H2 is mainly being considered for larger, heavier vehicles:
trains, trucks, long distance buses, large SUVs, perhaps even short range
airliners. It's not needed nor viable for ordinary cars.

Hummer have already built 2 large battery SUVs. And H2 trains makes no
bloody sense whatsoever - just electric the damn lines and if its too
expensive for overhead then they should recind that moronic rule about
no more 3rd rail and lay that instead.



Health and Safety at Work Act, isn't it?

And some more specificaly electric legislation IIRC which works
against inadequately protected conductors within reach.
Also not forgetting that 3rd rail involves fairly inefficient
distribution and there is an increasing amount of dual-voltage capable
stock.

Legislation is just words on paper. It can be changed or recinded. If it
doesn't break the laws of physics then it can be done.