China Unveils 'Track 1000' Liquid Hydrogen System for Trucks, Breaking 1,000Km (621 miles) Barrier Without Refueling.

[Caribbeans]

China Unveils 'Track 1000' Liquid Hydrogen System for Trucks, Breaking 1,000Km (621 miles) Barrier Without Refueling

FuelCellWorks.com | March 21, 2025

China has fired the starting gun on a new era of long-distance hydrogen-powered freight transport with the successful trial of a 100kg liquid hydrogen fuel-cell truck capable of going more than 1,000km (621 miles) without needing to stop.

The groundbreaking system — named “Track 1000” — was developed by the 101st Institute of the Sixth Academy of China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation (CASC), and integrated with a FAW Jiefang heavy-duty truck. The setup includes a 300kW liquid hydrogen fuel cell paired with a 100kg LH₂ storage tank.

This marks China’s first independently developed 100kg-class onboard LH₂ system and has now completed “sports car tests” using the FAW Jiefang Blue Path "Xingyi" hydrogen fuel cell tractor. With its strong output and performance benchmarks, it’s being hailed as a milestone in the evolution of LH₂-powered heavy vehicles.

“The pinnacle of technology! my country's first 100-kilogram vehicle-mounted liquid hydrogen system” boasted local media in typical fashion...

...At the heart of “Track 1000” lies a quintet of engineering breakthroughs that define what CASC claims is the cutting edge of mobile LH₂ technology. A third-party observer confirmed core data: aerospace-grade cryogenic insulation with less than 3% static evaporation rate, stable pressure management during operation, and hydrogen storage density of 10%, enabling efficient long-distance travel...more
https://fuelcellsworks.com/2025/03/21/clean-energy/china-unveils-track-1000-liquid-hydrogen-system-for-trucks-breaking-1-000km-barrier-without-refueling

May 2024

[Basso8vb]

1. Believe nothing from China, the land of shortcuts and fakery.

[Caribbeans]

2. Speaking of "shortcuts and fakery"

Why would anyone in China believe anything from the US?

This punk should have been shunned from the entire USA months ago

Not many Chinese are dumb enough to believe anything at all from the CIA

[Think. Again.]

4. I believe Chinese technology is pretty well accepted around the world.

In fact, I don't believe you could away from it you tried!

[NNadir]

3. I'd sure hate to be next to that piece of wasteful shit if it rolled over, particularly if it were subject to...

...metal fatigue resulting from hydrogen embrittlement.

It would be safer and cleaner and far less stupid and destructive if it simply burned the natural gas from which the hydrogen was made, although it's quite possible, given that it is in China, that it was made from the steam reforming of coal, since the latter accounts for the bulk of Chinese hydrogen.

In any case, it's a filthy machine and nothing more than an unconscionable effort to greenwash fossil fuels.

[Think. Again.]

5. Ha! Yeah, thank goodness fossil fuels don't burn...

...oh, wait...

[NNadir]

6. Well, if one is literate, one can tell the difference from a gas with the third lowest critical temperature of any...

...known substance, - only ³He and ⁴He have lower critical temperatures than hydrogen - and particularly one made by the destruction of exergy - in China hydrogen is generally from coal - and a liquid at room temperature. Of course to appreciate that, one would need to know what the consequences of critical temperature mean to explosive limits.

If one doesn't give a shit about fossil fuel use or the destruction of the planetary atmosphere, one clearly doesn't give a shit about the use of fossil fuels to make hydrogen toys to market fossil fuels.

Here's an article from something with which people trying to rebrand fossil fuels as "hydrogen" - people who don't give a shit about the environment at all - from something called "the primary scientific literature" about how hydrogen is made in China:

Subsidizing Grid-Based Electrolytic Hydrogen Will Increase Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Coal Dominated Power Systems Liqun Peng, Yang Guo, Shangwei Liu, Gang He, and Denise L. Mauzerall Environmental Science & Technology 2024 58 (12), 5187-5195

The text is clear enough.

From the introductory text:

... Currently, nearly all hydrogen in China is either produced directly from fossil fuels (55% from coal gasification and 14% from steam methane reforming (SMR)) or as a byproduct of petroleum refining (28%), with only 1% coming from water electrolysis. (2) Producing 1 kg of coal- or SMR-based hydrogen emits roughly 19 and 10 kg of CO2, respectively. (3) In 2020, hydrogen production from fossil fuels in China emitted approximately 322Tg of CO2, equivalent to 25% of total CO2 emissions from industrial processes, a number expected to rise with increasing hydrogen demand. (4) Industrial processes include production of nonmetallic mineral products, chemical, and metal products, as well as production and consumption of halocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride. (4)

.

The bold, italics and underlining is mine.

EST: Chinese Hydrogen Production Is Making Climate Change Worse.

Recently, I encountered a muttering fool who tried to sell me on the horseshit that so called "renewable energy" is leading to a putative "energy transition" that doesn't exist and claimed that so called "renewable energy" was reducing coal use.

I suggested that the muttering fool in question might wish to look at something called "facts" about coal use, say, from the reports of the International Energy Agency, because it is a fact that despite the expenditure, squandering actually, of trillions of dollars on solar and wind, coal use is at the highest level ever, not that barely literature reactionary supporters of so called "renewable energy" give a fuck about coal. They are only interested in attacking nuclear energy.

From the IEA on 2024:

Global coal demand is expected to grow by 1% in 2024 to an all-time high of 8.77 billion tonnes (Bt). This represents a considerable slowdown in growth from previous years: global coal consumption rose by 7.7% in 2021 as it rebounded from the Covid shock the year before, by 4.7% in 2022 and by 2.4% in 2023. Although industrial consumption also increased over that period, the power sector has been the main driver of coal demand growth, with electricity generation from coal set to reach an all-time high of 10 700 terawatt-hours (TWh) in 2024.

At the regional level, coal demand in China is expected to grow by 1% in 2024 to reach 4.9 Bt, another record. India is poised to see demand growth of over 5% to 1.3 Bt, a level that only China has reached previously. In the European Union and the United States, coal demand continues to fall, but at a significantly slower pace. It is on track to decline by 12% and 5% respectively this year, compared with 23% and 17% in 2023...

We are now one quarter of the way into the 21st century, in which the concentration of the dangerous fossil fuel waste carbon dioxide in the planetary atmosphere rose by close to 60 ppm, now approaching 430 ppm, despite the delusional rhetoric of people - for all 25 years of this century - with low reading comprehension claiming so called "renewable energy" was saving the world.

In my opinion, such people can't think at all, even if they try again and again and again, because clearly they are disinterested in information, scientific or otherwise. I haven't met one here who bothers to read, even at an elementary school level.

I have never been privileged to teach children, but I would expect that a third grader, without even being precocious might be able to tell the difference between 8 (solar) + 8 (wind) = 16 and 175 (coal) in the following table:



IEA World Energy Outlook 2024
Table A.1a: World energy supply Page 296.

If their capable of doing simple arithmetic, they can recognize that while combined solar and wind "grew" by an unimpressive 15 Exajoules - this at a cost of trillions of dollars where more than one and a half billion people lack access to basic sanitation - from 2010 to 2023, to 16 Exajoules, the use of coal rose by 22 Exajoules to 175 Exajoules. I do believe that most 3rd graders could manage the calculation.

IEA overview, Energy Investments.

But look, it's pretty clear about what the airheads here hyping hydrogen are. They are here with slick clearly fossil fuel funded slick videos to greenwash fossil fuels as "hydrogen." They are selling fossil fuels because they just don't give a shit.

Such people have never given a shit about the collapse of the planetary atmosphere, and never will. They're selling something, and they clearly don't give a flying fuck about the consequences of their dishonest marketing of fossil fuels.

How about a mutter, like uh-huh

Ignorance kills people. It is generally not useful to call the purveyors of ignorance out, since they lack intellectual and moral rigor and thus nothing will shut them up, but nevertheless, it seems to me that one must try to do so, even though it's clear that ignorance has won the day.

Congratulations on the big "victory," such as it is:

Weekly average CO2 at Mauna Loa

New Weekly CO2 Concentration Record Set at the Mauna Loa Observatory, 428.15 ppm & 1st daily reading to exceed 430 ppm.

[Think. Again.]

7. And if one has common sense, one can tell it's much safer...

...to have a flammable substance that if released, rises up away from the ground, structures, and people due to being lighter than air, rather than pooling in and around the things that one doesn't want damaged.

Or one would know know Green Hydrogen doesn't produce CO2 (or any GHG) at any stage of production or use.

Or one would be aware that CO2 is rising in the atmosphere because we are not building out clean energy alternatives fast enough to keep up with our increasing energy usage.

Ignorance kills.