Car manufacturers and governments have been eagerly seeking a replacement for the automobile's main source of power, the internal-combustion engine. By far the most promising alternative source of energy for cars is the hydrogen-based fuel-cell engine, wh

The lecture and the passage discuss hydrogen-based fuel-cell engine potential to replicate prevalent combustion engines used in automobiles. The author promotes the idea that fuel-cell engines are appropriate alternatives to suplicate combustion engines in the future. However, providing several counterarguments, the lecturer seriously casts doubts on the points made by the passage. She states that the author has presented a dramatically optimistic perspective.

First, the lecturer clarifies that it excruciating to produce hydrogen requierd for fuel-cell motors. She asserts the procedure for manufacturing and storage of the hydrogen needs highly advanced technologies. This refutes the passage which stated fuel-cell engines utilize eazily available fuel sources.

Second, the lecturer states that reading has been too superficial in its statement that fuel-cell enigines solves the pollution problem in the globe. She points out that although fuel-cell engines directly does not emit carbon dioxide and other pollutants, the procedure of manufacturing hydrogen require to burn coal or oil which in turn cause a lot of pollution. Therefore, fuel-cell engines are not as clean as they seem.

Finally, the lecturer refutes the idea that fuel-cell engiens are less costly. She mentions that manufacturing the motor involves using platinum, a rare and expensive material. Saying that endeavors to find an alternative for it are being unsuccessful, she claims that this engiens are not cost efficient at all. This, again, counters the passage which claimed fuel-cell engines are more cost efficient since they need less fuel.