tml -->
(1.) Whole-systems thinking, at the scale that will be required for total de-carbonization and de-GHG-emission of the entire human enterprise, by 2050 + X, is required to guide our transportation energy strategy for all modes and vehicle sizes. This modeling analysis would compare, technically and economically, "electrification of transportation" and "electrification of everything" via electricity and via hydrogen infrastructure. We have not seen that analysis attempted, or even identified as important, or even possible. Hypothesis: electricity infrastructure is relegated to the first-and-last-km, or few km, of future "clean" economy-wide energy systems, while all other energy infrastructure is gaseous hydrogen (GH2) and / or liquid ammonia (NH3) in underground pipelines relatively safe from acts of God and man.
(2.) "EV's" simply turn vehicle wheels via electric motors energized by electric energy stored on-board as chemical energy in battery molecules or in hydrogen (H2) molecules. The official and vernacular definition of "electric car" and "electric vehicle" should include both electricity and hydrogen fueling and storage options, in order to engage now on (1), to avoid misallocation of public policy, of large amounts of capital, and avoid wasted precious global climate change (GCC) response time.
(3.) At the very large scale in (1), gaseous hydrogen (GH2) systems based on underground pipelines gathering GHG-emission-free "clean" energy from distant, dispersed, wind and solar plants are much less costly to build (CAPEX) and operate (OPEX) than electricity systems. See: DeSantis, D., James, B., Houchins, C., Saur, G., Ljubovsky, M., 2021 Relative Cost of Long-Distance Energy Transmission by Electricity vs. Gaseous and Liquid Fuels. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589004221014668
(4.) When we are able to bore "deep enough, cheap enough" to profitably harvest and deliver "clean" energy from ubiquitous Deep Hot Dry Rock Geothermal (DHDRG) energy, we will produce "geothermal anywhere", thus electricity and hydrogen anywhere, which will greatly reduce the cost and danger of hydrogen fueling infrastructure, thus the cost of on-board-vehicle hydrogen, as-fueled for FCEV's of all sizes and modes. DHDRG "anywhere" will also facilitate BEV fueling, by minimizing electricity "Grid" infrastructure. This nascent DHDRG potential needs to be included in (1), above.
(5.) "BEV, FCEV, or ICE ?" is barking up the wrong tree: non of these. In the next few decades, climate-change-driven rapid sea level rise will force millions to abandon their "underwater" coastal real estate. These Internally Displaced Persons (IDP's) will migrate upland and inland: the new Okies. Where will we put them; what build for them, that they -- and we -- can afford ? For thousands of years, humans at persistent, geographically-favored urban sites, have simply built new civilizations atop old, obsolete ones. In USA we should now plan to follow suit, "helicoptering-down" upon the car-dependent sprawl of low-density regions of our cities, mistakenly designed and built post-WW2 for cars, instead of for people, new "CarFree" loops -- donuts, toruses -- for 100,000 people or more, as mixed-density neighborhood pearls on a necklace of a contra-rotating pair of concentric fixed-guideway transit. Imagine light rail or streetcar hubs, a few km apart, carrying people, packages, mail, most freight. A train in either direction is only a few minutes away. A CarFree necklace, with plenty of paving for walking, biking, wheelchairs and service vehicles -- but no driveways, garages, gas stations, or parking lots.
See: https://vimeo.com/373679728 Designing “CarFree” Cities to Welcome Millions Fleeing Rapid Sea Level Rise, Within a Few Decades
Therefore, let's not build millions of BEV's and FCEV's to feed our car-culture addiction, with its heavy tread upon Earth. Be "CarFree", instead. Let's begin at (1), above. See you at the station.