Jeremy Clarkson on Hydrogen Fuel Cars: His Real View

Jeremy Clarkson does not think hydrogen fuel is the future of cars—he has repeatedly called it impractical and inefficient compared to battery electric vehicles. While he acknowledges hydrogen’s potential for heavy transport, he views it as a dead end for passenger cars due to high costs, scarce refueling infrastructure, and poor energy efficiency.

Formula

The calculator compares the fuel cost of driving 100 km in a hydrogen fuel cell car versus a battery electric car. The hydrogen cost per 100 km is (fuel price per kg ÷ car efficiency in km/kg) × 100. The EV cost per 100 km is (100 ÷ efficiency in km/kWh) × electricity price per kWh. The ratio is hydrogen cost divided by EV cost—a value above 1 means hydrogen is more expensive.

Worked Example

Using the default values: hydrogen at $15/kg, a fuel cell car doing 100 km/kg, an EV doing 6 km/kWh, and electricity at $0.15/kWh. Hydrogen cost: (15 ÷ 100) × 100 = $15.00 per 100 km. EV cost: (100 ÷ 6) × 0.15 = $2.50 per 100 km. Ratio: 15.00 ÷ 2.50 = 6.0—hydrogen is six times more expensive to fuel than electricity for the same distance.

Clarkson’s Journey from Hydrogen Skeptic to EV Convert

Clarkson’s views on alternative fuels have shifted over his decades as a motoring journalist. In the early 2000s, he mocked electric cars as golf carts and praised hydrogen as a potential savior of the internal combustion engine. But by the late 2010s, after driving Tesla’s Model S and experiencing rapid acceleration and long-range practicality, he changed his stance. In his columns for The Sunday Times and in The Grand Tour episodes, he admitted he was wrong about EVs and criticized hydrogen as a distraction—pointing out that producing hydrogen via electrolysis wastes roughly 30% of the energy, then converting it back to electricity in a fuel cell wastes another 40%.

Why Hydrogen Loses for Cars: The Efficiency Argument

The core technical problem is round-trip efficiency. When you generate electricity from a renewable source and use it to charge a battery, about 90% of the energy reaches the wheels. With hydrogen, the process is: electricity → electrolysis to split water → compress or liquefy hydrogen → transport it → store it in the car → fuel cell converts it back to electricity. Each step loses energy, leaving only about 30–40% of the original electricity. This means a hydrogen car needs roughly three times more renewable electricity to travel the same distance as a battery EV. Clarkson has made this point bluntly: why waste two-thirds of the energy when you can just put the electricity in a battery?

Infrastructure and Cost: The Practical Barriers

Even if efficiency were acceptable, the infrastructure gap is enormous. As of 2024, there are fewer than 60 public hydrogen refueling stations in the entire United States, almost all in California. Europe has about 200, mostly in Germany. Compare that to over 100,000 public EV charging stations in the US and millions worldwide. Building a hydrogen station costs around $2 million, versus $100,000 for a fast-charging hub. The hydrogen itself is also expensive—retail prices range from $15 to $30 per kilogram in California, and a car like the Toyota Mirai needs about 5.6 kg for a 400-mile range, costing roughly $84–$168 per fill-up. Clarkson has pointed out that you can buy a lot of petrol for that, and even more electricity.

Where Hydrogen Makes Sense: Trucks, Ships, and Industry

Clarkson’s criticism is aimed at passenger cars, not hydrogen as a whole. He has acknowledged that hydrogen fuel cells make sense for long-haul trucking, shipping, and aviation, where battery weight and charging time are prohibitive. A semi truck with a 1,000-mile range would need a battery weighing 20,000 pounds, whereas a hydrogen tank and fuel cell weigh a fraction of that. Similarly, container ships crossing oceans cannot stop to charge; hydrogen or ammonia (derived from hydrogen) can be stored as liquid fuel. In these sectors, the lower efficiency is acceptable because the alternative—batteries—is physically impossible. Clarkson’s position aligns with most energy experts: hydrogen is a niche fuel for heavy transport, not a universal replacement for petrol.

The Car Industry’s Mixed Signals

Automakers have sent conflicting messages. Toyota and Hyundai have invested heavily in fuel cell cars—the Mirai and the Nexo—but sales have been tiny. Toyota sold about 2,700 Mirais in the US in 2023, while Tesla sold over 1.8 million EVs globally. Honda discontinued its Clarity Fuel Cell in 2021. Meanwhile, BMW and Mercedes have experimented with hydrogen prototypes but have not committed to mass production. The lack of refueling infrastructure is a chicken-and-egg problem: no one buys hydrogen cars because there are no stations, and no one builds stations because there are no cars. Clarkson has noted this absurdity, asking why any rational consumer would choose a car with a 400-mile range and a 10-minute refuel time when they can buy an EV with the same range and charge at home overnight.

Common Misconceptions About Hydrogen Cars

One frequent misconception is that hydrogen is a zero-emission fuel. While a fuel cell car emits only water vapor from its tailpipe, the production of hydrogen often relies on natural gas—about 95% of US hydrogen is “gray” hydrogen, made via steam methane reforming, which releases CO2. Green hydrogen (from electrolysis using renewable electricity) is clean but currently costs two to three times more. Another misconception is that hydrogen refueling is as fast as petrol. It is—about 3 to 5 minutes—but the stations are so rare that drivers often queue for 30 minutes or more. Finally, some believe hydrogen is safer than batteries. In reality, hydrogen is highly flammable and must be stored at 700 bar (10,000 psi) in reinforced tanks. While modern tanks are robust, a leak in an enclosed space can create an explosion risk. Clarkson has joked that he would rather sit on a lithium-ion battery than a compressed hydrogen tank.

Frequently Asked Questions

Did Jeremy Clarkson ever say hydrogen was the future?

Yes, in the early 2000s he wrote positively about hydrogen as a way to keep combustion engines alive. But he changed his mind after driving modern EVs and now says hydrogen is a dead end for cars. His current view is that battery electric is the only practical zero-emission option for passenger vehicles.

Why does Clarkson hate hydrogen cars?

He doesn’t hate them personally, but he criticizes them on three grounds: energy inefficiency (about 30% of the original electricity reaches the wheels), lack of refueling infrastructure (fewer than 60 stations in the US), and high cost (around $15–$30 per kg, making a fill-up more expensive than petrol).

Does Clarkson think hydrogen is useful for anything?

Yes. He has said hydrogen makes sense for trucks, ships, and planes where batteries are too heavy. He supports hydrogen for heavy transport but sees no logic in using it for cars when batteries work better.

What is the main difference between hydrogen and electric cars?

Hydrogen cars generate electricity on board using a fuel cell, then store it in a small buffer battery. Electric cars store electricity directly in a large battery. The key difference is efficiency: EVs use about 90% of the grid electricity, while hydrogen cars use only about 30–40%.

Are hydrogen cars cheaper to run than EVs?

No. Based on typical US prices, a hydrogen car costs about $15–$30 per 100 km, while an EV costs $2.50–$5.00 per 100 km. The calculator above shows the exact comparison using your local prices. Hydrogen is currently 3 to 6 times more expensive per kilometer.

Will hydrogen cars ever become mainstream?

Most analysts say no for passenger cars, because the efficiency penalty and infrastructure cost are insurmountable. Hydrogen may become mainstream in trucking and shipping, but for personal vehicles, battery electric technology has already won the race.

Related

• Apple Generative AI Mac Plans: What to Expect
• Raspberry Pi Artificial Intelligence Projects to Try
• Only Apple Intelligence Feature I Use? How to Choose

in t | Fuel cost per kg | USD/kg | 15 | 0 | 100
in e | Car efficiency | km/kg | 100 | 0 | 500
in c | Comparable EV efficiency | km/kWh | 6 | 0 | 20
in p | Electricity cost | USD/kWh | 0.15 | 0 | 1
out cph | Cost per 100 km (hydrogen) | USD | (t / e) * 100 | 2
out cpe | Cost per 100 km (EV) | USD | (100 / c) * p | 2
out ratio | Hydrogen cost vs EV | x | (t / e) / ((100 / c) * p) | 2