A second key conclusion is that nanoscaling is a valid design strategy that can produce a complex hydride for LDV operation, despite the apparent capacity penalties relative to the bulk material. The drastic difference in system performance predicted using the simulated LDV drive cycle shows that, regardless of the relatively similar VSC of the bulk and nanoscale storage systems, the much more difficult heat transport problem encountered for the Li3N-based tank (arising from the larger ΔH, lower k, and slower kinetics) creates a scenario in which the fuel cell vehicle is impossible to start. This occurs because the head space hydrogen is completely combusted before the temperature of the hydride bed is high enough to produce the required hydrogen desorption rate. In stark contrast, the (LiNH2+2LiH)@(6-nm PC)-based tank completes the entire drive cycle. It should be emphasized that, although the heat transport properties of the bulk material could be improved by mixing it with a thermally conducting material such as ENG, this reduces the storage capacity and lacks the thermodynamic and kinetic benefits of nanoscaling. We also note that the heat capacity of the nanoscale material, which we assumed to have the same value as the bulk hydride, is doubtless lower than that of the bulk hydride. This would accentuate its performance advantage in the fuel cell simulations. However, although our DFT calculations predict that the heat capacities of isolated LiNH2 and LiH nanoparticles are essentially the same as their bulk counterparts, that analysis neglects the effects of hydride loading and the properties of the porous carbon host. Consequently, the impact of this property will have to assessed in a future investigation.