World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Tesla is on the way down in every major market China/USA/EU, So it won't be long before Tesla isn't number 2 either. VW is clearly the leader in EU, but they are not so strong in either USA or China. So maybe Hyundai or Toyota will be the next brand to surpass Tesla?
IMO VW group has the best affordable EV's currently, I just bought a VW ID.4 last month, but if I had the money, I would have bought a BMW or Mercedes. But the ID.4 is still a very nice car and I'm quite happy with it. 😎
In a few years Tesla will probably be behind BYD, Geely, Xpeng, Toyota, Hyundai and VW group.
On the technology they are already way behind the Chinese brands on charging, and VW, BMW and Mercedes on quality. Probably also behind Hyundai.
Toyota is only getting started on BEV, so I'm not really counting them yet. But I am confident they will compete in the top soon.
I think Toyota is still betting on hydrogen? I hope hydrogen can take off in the mass market, soon. It has the potential to be a better energy store than batteries.
In the US at least, I really don't see hydrogen ever taking off. Even in California, there's so few stations that you can't really travel from the top of the state to the bottom without going out of your way. The hydrogen fuel stations that are in place are even more expensive than they were a few years ago, if they're still functioning at all. We're talking like $180 USD for the equivalent of a tank of gas, at stations that aren't as convenient as a gas station or an outlet at home. It's even the subject of a lawsuit, which may or may not be successful.
It seems like hydrogen has already lost the race for the rest of the world, with BEV adoption growing substantially in Europe and China. Personally I wouldn't want my market to rely on solely Japan and a US headed by someone blatantly antagonistic to alternative fuels.
My impression is that much of the world is more positive on hydrogen than the USA. Toyota seems to be slow-walking EVs in anticipation of hydrogen breakthroughs. Mist of what you say about fuel stations could have been said about charging infrastructure not that long ago.
I'm definitely open to being wrong about the world's impression of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, but I'm not sure it's borne out in the data. Europe doesn't seem to be adapting it anywhere near the rate at which they've adopted BEVs (I couldn't find a 2025 report in my cursory search, but would love to see one if anyone else finds it), nor does China, which is all in on BEVs. In fact, it seems like California may have more hydrogen fuel cell vehicles alone than all of Europe combined. That's two of the major markets accounted for, but it might be possible to convince the US to adopt hydrogen when they decide they no longer want to be left in the past.
I'm not sure the infrastructure build out for hydrogen is directly comparable to the charging infrastructure for BEVs. At least some segment of the population has access to charging infrastructure just by virtue of having access to an outlet at their homes, which allows for trickle charging, as well as the option to install a dedicated charger at home that allows for much cheaper charging that's also fast enough to charge from 0-100 overnight, so no need to stop at a fuel station at all. This meant that there were people who were willing to adopt the technology through the growing pains. With hydrogen, you run into a bit of a chicken and the egg problem where companies aren't encouraged to expand infrastructure without adoption rates being high enough and consumers aren't itching to purchase a vehicle where fuel is more expensive and less convenient to access. The refuel card incentives were supposed to get consumers over that hump, but it doesn't seem like it was anywhere near enough. I think the conditions were ripe for an emergent technology to eventually replace ICE vehicles, but hydrogen fueled vehicles were on the back foot to begin with.
The fact that Hydrogen, the most readily available element in the Universe, is not our primary fuel source demonstrates how ignorant the majority of people on the planet are. If everyone knew, they would look at any other energy source as a complete waste of resources and demand better.
Hydrogen is a major fuel source, just not in the form that's necessary to power hydrogen fuel cell cars. Regular gas vehicles are powered by hydrogen, since they're a component of gasoline. Any energy generated by liquified natural gas (though I hate the term) is using hydrogen as a fuel source. It's not exactly easy to create, liquify, store, and transport pure elemental hydrogen for use in hydrogen fuel cell cars, let alone the cost to develop all the infrastructure to do so. I don't think it's a collective action problem, and if we were going to rally around a singular transportation issue, I think it'd be far more valuable to demand robust public transit options.
Electrolysis can separate Hydrogen from Oxygen in water. It is also incredibly eco friendly, and incredibly easy to scale up. Hydrogen as a fuel also produces water vapor as a byproduct. Not to mention Hydrogen Fusion technology for Nuclear energy production will be the way if we get our collective heads on right.
Feel free to tell me how you plan to power your theoretical public transport grid without mentioning Solar and wind farms which are are incredibly destructive to the environment to build, maintain, and operate.
How are we sustainably converting elemental hydrogen into a state where it's readily storable and transportable for use in vehicles? I'm not pushing against it as a viable energy source generally speaking, but it really doesn't need to be in a car, where it's used to power an electric motor in the exact same way as a battery is, except the battery can recapture energy through regenerative breaking. I was pushing back against the implication that humanity is stupid for not using hydrogen in general, because we use a lot of it.
For the record, your all-powerful and flawless elemental hydrogen can power the grid just as readily as it could power a car. It'd be great if it were a larger share of our energy generation, for the record.
For the record, I wasn't speaking about personal vehicles. Nor did I make one mention of them. But since you wish to ignore my point and change the topic: If I had it my way, no one would own a personal vehicle. EV or otherwise.
You said that we aren't using hydrogen as a fuel source, which is patently false. You must think we're burning those hydrogenless hydrocarbons that so famously exist. It's not in the form that you like, but we're literally using copious amounts of hydrogen as a fuel source and have been for decades. It isn't suddenly not hydrogen because it's attached to carbon when we choose to burn it. Plain elemental hydrogen doesn't exist in abundance in any capacity that we're capable of harnessing, which is why you have to bring up methods to create it even when it's the most abundant element in the universe. You're the one who chose to respond to me, in my comment about its use in cars, in response to someone else's comment about hydrogen in cars, in a thread about cars and somehow I'm the one who's changing the topic?
Done with you now. Take care.
And how do you renewably generate the power for electrolysis without solar or wind farms?
You seem like a smart cookie. Use your noodle.