This sort of configuration is one I have long advocated, which uses batteries for what they are good for, daily commutes, and fuel cells where they beat carrying a thumping great battery about for longer distance travel.

@peskanov:

They say:

'Following on from the partnerships already entered into, this vehicle has a carbon footprint that is 75% smaller than that of an electric vehicle such as the Megane E-Tech electric. '

So their comparison is one where they have access to the whole carbon accounting chain.

It sounds similar to me to the excellent analysis GHG Polestar did for their Polestar 2 against their own ICE equivalent.

These things are always going to be a bit fluffy around the edges, dependent on all sorts of things like where the car is build and the grid there, and a host of other factors.

There is nothing there that makes me think that they are pulling my leg though.

I'd also note that Renault have considerable experience with this sort of configuration, has for several years they have had a small fleet of Kangoo FC hybrids running around, mainly for La Poste.

peskanov:

Its the better energy density and easy shipment of methanol etc which attracts me to that solution.

I have no current links to share, as the relevant safety videos testing hydrogen tanks and their upward venting outside of the cabin, even if the hydrogen catches fire, are no longer up, as it was a live issue around 15 years or so ago, but I was very comfortable after studying them that the safety was way better than ICE, where petrol pools on the ground, or many big battery chemistries, where putting the fire out is a major issue.

Of the three, ICE, most non solid state lithium big battery chemistries, or fuel cells, I would choose the last on safety grounds if I were in a car for fire and explosive issues.

When they gonna starting a hydrogen infrastructure for cars.

Carbon body panels is carbon that did not go into the air

@sd:

Fair comment. We are some way off rolling out fuel cell hybrid cars, partly due to cost, but mainly perhaps due to limited infrastructure.

The way that the puzzle is being tackled in Europe by Stellantis and Renault is the introduction of commercial fuel cell hybrids, using Symbio fuel cells, in association with Michelin.

Here is Stellantis, with the article also referencing Renault:
https://europe.autonews.com/automakers/peugeot-citroen-opel-start-production-hydrogen-vans

' The vans are based on full-electric versions, and use a “mid power” hybrid powertrain that can deliver 400 km (250 miles) of zero-emission range on the WLTP cycle without having to spend hours recharging batteries, the brands said.

At the heart of the powertrain is a 10.5 kilowatt-hour battery, which can be recharged conventionally with a plug, offering 50 km of range. This range is included in the 400k m total figure.

But its primary source of charge is a 45-kilowatt fuel cell with a 4.4-kg tank that can be refueled in three minutes.

The brands say the hydrogen powertrain does not affect cargo capacity, which is 5.3 cubic meters for a shorter version and 6.1 cubic meters for a longer version. The vans have a payload of about 1,000 kg.'

Note the smaller battery and the beefier fuel cell in the application.

For many routes for commercial vehicles it is easier to figure out if there are enough hydrogen stations in the area to make the typical routes practical.

So for instance if you are buying a van in Paris, you might not need extensive hydrogen coverage elsewhere in France.

In the last few days in response to the events in Ukraine hydrogen production and roll out has been accelerated in Europe, which should help.

“Renault Group through Hyvia (joint venture with Plug Power) already offers hydrogen solutions on LCVs.”
https://www.plugpower.com/applications/
This works well in many applications particularly if you have your own H2 infrastructure.
For Military, Light Aircraft, LCVs a Range Extended EV where Plug In would be difficult this could work well since it would be able to applied in addition to the BEV architecture. And as @Davemart points out, Methanol would be even better.

@sd,
Countries that are fast-tracking the H2 infrastructure are those that do not have much NG reserves and have to import massive quantities of NG. So, the H2 to be produced from Renewables and Nuclear is intended to replace the NG that has to be imported.

My crystal ball tells me that eventually pure H2 will replace Natural Gas (NG) in existing NG piping systems, and thus H2 transportation will be just as easy as transporting NG currently, and H2 will be available everywhere NG is available. The Ukraine war though very devastating, is a major boost for rapid acceleration of green H2 development to replace NG. Necessity is the mother of invention !

When H2 will be available everywhere, then it would be a no-brainer to have Plug-in FCV (PFCV) with 40-mi range on battery and the rest on H2. This would require only 1/5 to 1/10 the battery capacity of a long-range BEV, thus would greatly alleviate the constrain of battery-making resources, ease the massive investment required on battery factories, ease the resources requirement for making FC since the FC stack will be much smaller in a PFCV vs in a FCV, and would allow us to accelerate much faster toward Zero-Emission mobility utilizing Green Energy.

A PFCV would solve the long charging time of a full BEV, and would also solve the slow acceleration of a full FCV since battery can provide a surge of power much more readily than the FC stack. People living in apartments can still own a PFCV and can charge it at work using daytime solar energy, while can travel long distances on weekends using H2 energy.
Here, we can see that an-universally-available H2 network will rapidly accelerate Green and Zero-Emission Mobility.

Australia have a vast potential to become the World's leader in H2 export and the king in future energy, given the vast stretches of sunny desert land in the continent, to replace the current coal export now.