RegGuheert wrote:That all assumes that hydrogen is the end-game when it comes to transportation. It is not, as I have pointed out repeatedly in this thread as well as others:lorenfb wrote:Any company, e.g. Tesla, relying on a single technology to maintain long term growth and not maintaining an R&D effort to transition to new technologies, e.g. FCEVs, as they become competitive is very likely to become marginal or non-existent, e.g. Kodak, Blackberry, IBM (marginal), HP (marginal), Intel (marginal compared to Qualcomm), and Microsoft (before the cloud). An automotive OEM would be very naive and negligent to their shareholders to not maintain a development effort for a FCEV, since it provides the most "transparent" transition from an ICEV for the consumer.
You have some valid points. But if you were the Engineering Director of R&D whose responsibility was to advise
corporate and the Board of Directors about future competitive technologies, you would assume the risk for the
corporation's future viability of not budgeting for R&D funds to evaluate and position the corporation for future technology breakthroughs, e.g. fuel cell generator and/or H2 production cost reductions, right?