Hypx

It is not a fantasy. In fact, the opposite is true. The problem is that you are wildly out of touch with recent events. You are still pretending like it is 2004, not realizing that that was 20 years ago. Green hydrogen is a rapidly growing market and is following the trajectory of wind and solar.

Except you've actually debunked your own argument.

At 9.3 kg of CO2 for one kg of H2, and assuming 110 km/kg of H2 (normal fuel economy for an FCEV), you get 84.5 grams of CO2 per km of driving.

Meanwhile, a BEV gets anywhere from 70-370 grams per km, depending on dirtiness of the grid: https://shrinkthatfootprint.com/electric-car-emissions/

In other words, an FCEV is comparable to a BEV when it comes to emissions. You can even double the numbers for the FCEV if you want to include possibilities like upstream losses or production. The numbers would still be very comparable to BEVs running on most grids.

And this is the problem here: You're so deep in your anti-hydrogen conspiracy theory that you failed to notice that the math works against you.

It is how giant publishing houses self-destruct in the gaming space. They fail to realize how difficult it is to build up talented devteams. Everything becomes about maximizing profits in the end. Between the shitty monetization tactics and the terrible working environment they've created, they end up destroying their ability to make good games. I fully expect more mediocrity from Xbox/Activision-Blizzard, if not declining quality.

Mass layoffs is going to make it worse, not better.

Those people are Tesla fanboys and investors. They are blatantly lying about competitive threats to BEVs. In reality, they have become a type of climate change denier. For them, the only "solutions" that can exist are the ones that make them money, and all the others must be stopped.

So was electricity until recently. Nearly all of it was made from fossil fuels. The difference is that we can make it from renewable energy.

And the exact same is true with hydrogen. If you cared at all, you'd google it yourself and realize that significant green hydrogen production is coming online. Not only is it all over the news, there are huge government programs supporting it now.

The fundamental problem is that you are either closed-minded or totally out of touch. It's time realize that it's 2024 and whatever outdated thinking you have is long over.

Open world games need two types of fast travel. The first is your standard type, which is pretty much a teleportation ability. That should be greatly limited. At most, just for cases where you need to travel across the entire map, and should be hidden behind some kind of in-game explanation like "you're taking a boat/plane/subway" or whatever.

The other one should be some way of moving really fast across the map so previously explored areas aren't a chore to move across. Literally fast travel, and not teleportation. And no, conventional solutions like horses or cars is still not fast enough. It's still minutes of mindlessly moving from point A to B in most cases. It needs to be truly fast. Spiderman 2 actually did explore this concept pretty well, with ideas like catapulting yourself or using a wingsuit to glide long distances. Other games need to come up with someway of allow players to cross huge distances in in a few seconds.

There's good reason to believe that Tesla is an Enron-esque style fraud. No one in charge has shown any business acumen, and no one can explain how it is actually profitable. But that requires only stooges and yes-men on the board. There cannot be any accountability.

I just provided you a source. You're creating your own alternate reality here.

That's the OP. You didn't provide any sources yourself.

The issue of leakage is just a potential risk, as your own link mentions. In practice, it's a non-issue. We don't worry about gasoline begin too dangerous or EVs being too quiet. It is just fearmongering. Like I pointed out in my study, they are looking at hydrogen for long term energy storage, because it is good at it. Your claim that we can't store for long periods is simply wrong.

People have looked at hydrogen for long term storage. There is real science to back this up. Also, you never provided any sources to begin with. So you are demanding a double standard here.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352152X21011580