Why Doesn't Tesla Use Hydrogen Fuel Cells?

[DelSteven]

Tesla does not use hydrogen fuel cells due to difficulties in collection, high costs, and manufacturing challenges. Here is additional information: 1. How hydrogen fuel cells work: Hydrogen is delivered to the anode plate (negative electrode) of the fuel cell. Under the action of a catalyst (platinum), one electron is separated from the hydrogen atom. The hydrogen ion (proton), which has lost an electron, passes through the proton exchange membrane to reach the cathode plate (positive electrode) of the fuel cell. The electron cannot pass through the proton exchange membrane and can only reach the cathode plate through an external circuit, thereby generating current in the external circuit. After the electron reaches the cathode plate, it recombines with oxygen atoms and hydrogen ions to form water. 2. Power density of hydrogen fuel cells: Power density can be simply understood as the battery's ability to release an extremely large current in a short time (instantaneously). For vehicles, situations like "flooring the accelerator" for overtaking or sudden acceleration, or suddenly climbing a slope, are all "high power density demand" states. However, the physical characteristics of hydrogen fuel cells are high energy density but low power density.

[LuciaLee]

Tesla doesn't pursue hydrogen fuel cells mainly due to technical reasons. Pure electric vehicles are more efficient—just think about the production and transportation process of hydrogen fuel, where energy loss exceeds 60%, while lithium batteries charge directly from the grid with efficiency as high as 90% or more. Tesla has always emphasized cost control, and hydrogen systems, including storage tanks and production equipment, are very expensive. Coupled with the sharp drop in lithium battery prices in recent years, Tesla's own Gigafactory has long achieved large-scale production. Safety is also a factor, as lithium batteries are managed more reliably. In terms of market infrastructure, charging stations have become widespread globally, and Tesla's Supercharger network is very convenient. I think Tesla has invested so much in pure electric technology that there's no reason to switch directions, especially since users have already gotten used to the fast-charging experience. In the future, hydrogen fuel might gain traction in the trucking sector, but passenger vehicles will still be led by pure electric. This reminds me of Tesla's early Roadster innovation—the advantages built step by step shouldn't be casually abandoned.

[HectorLee]

Tesla didn't choose hydrogen fuel mainly because it's too costly and impractical. Hydrogen vehicles require dedicated refueling stations, which are slow to build and expensive to maintain, while charging infrastructure is developing rapidly – there are several Tesla Supercharger spots near my home. Hydrogen production consumes enormous energy, from electrolysis to compression and transportation, with each step being a money pit. In comparison, pure EVs simply plug in, saving both money and hassle. Tesla's strategy focuses on mass-market appeal, with battery prices continuously dropping, making cars like the Model 3 affordable. Additionally, hydrogen systems pose safety risks, with combustion hazards causing concern, so Tesla prefers refining battery technology for better safety. Market response speaks volumes too – pure EV sales grow yearly while hydrogen vehicles remain limited to pilot projects in few regions. Following trends, Tesla logically chose the mainstream solution. This reminds me of traditional ICE vehicles transitioning, where going electric is the natural step.

[NaomiMarie]

Tesla remains steadfast in its commitment to pure electric vehicles, as hydrogen fuel has too many drawbacks. Hydrogen production typically relies on fossil fuels, which is highly polluting and not environmentally friendly, whereas batteries can be charged using renewable energy, making them greener. Hydrogen fuel has low energy density, offering limited range per fill-up and consuming significant amounts of water, while Tesla's batteries already exceed 600 kilometers in range. In terms of cost, hydrogen refueling infrastructure is slow to develop and requires massive investment, whereas charging stations are proliferating rapidly, allowing Tesla owners to charge conveniently. Technological expertise is another factor—Tesla leads the world in battery management, while hydrogen systems lack similar advantages. Market acceptance is also poor, as users are reluctant to deal with the hassle of hydrogen refueling. Overall, hydrogen is better suited for specific applications, while pure electric is the superior choice for passenger vehicles.

[SanSamuel]

Tesla avoids hydrogen fuel primarily due to efficiency and scalability issues. The hydrogen supply chain, from production to refueling, is lengthy and inefficient, while direct battery charging is straightforward and efficient. Tesla's Gigafactories have reduced battery costs, whereas hydrogen materials like storage tanks remain expensive. In terms of infrastructure, charging networks are well-developed, while hydrogen refueling stations are scarce globally, leading to poor user experience. From a safety perspective, hydrogen is prone to leaks and carries high combustion risks, whereas Tesla's solid-state battery design is safer. Strategically, Tesla has deep expertise in pure electric ecosystems. I believe hydrogen may find use in long-haul transportation in the future, but pure electric will dominate passenger vehicles, similar to the autonomous driving trend led by Tesla.