Toyota and Lexus Still Hating on Plug-Ins and EVs

it won't change much until gas starts to rapidly increase in price. who knows when that will be? maybe not in our lifetime.

 

give it a few years. Prices are not likely to go up in next 12-18mo but then they will creep up back to ~3.50.

Still even with another hike it is unlikely we will see equivalent of $8 in current dollars.

And in unthinkable case if they do hit $8, 50MPG ICE or hybrid will do nicely - problem solved.

the post #67 you refer to described "electric car user" usage pattern. Those who do not fit it do not buy them, does it make sense? You cannot deduct all human behavior patterns from blind people behavior, can you? Are we all walking with the sticks and seeing dogs?

 

I think we have lost the point here. Toyota's contention was these fast chargers would break the grid. I have tried to demonstrate with numbers that Japan can easily add combined cycle natural gas power plants in the time these longer range BEVs come to market. These power plants are inexpensive compared to hydrogen infrastructure. They can be built quickly, and power can easily be blended with renewable as they are added.

I am not arguing Japanese energy policy with you. The country does want to reduce oil use and substitute natural gas and renewable electricity for oil, and is pursuing both fcv and plug-ins to get there. Japan also has strong hybrid incentives, the last one just ended a little over a year ago Part of the reason is that they import oil from OPEC, but they import natural gas from opec and non-opec. The big exporters are Australia, Quatar (OPEC), Indoneasia (OPEC), Malaysia. Still 44% of Japan's energy in 2013 was from oil, almost of of it imported from OPEC.
http://www.eia.gov/countries/analysisbriefs/Japan/japan.pdf

I was picking their most efficient gasoline only cars to compare to the electricity consumption of a Tesla S 70D. Certainly the lower number of miles mean that grid infrastructure in not the problem Toyota makes it out to be. The people that I know that live there only average around 100 miles a week, and take the train to work most days and the train or planes on longer trips.

+1

 

gosh - I sure wish you could have shared that 'cost too much' and 'impractical' pearl of wisdom with the (registered over the last decade) 300,000 factory made & home brew electric car owners in the U.S. ... All they seem to know is that it's a great idea. and funny you'd want to glom hydrogen cars into the same group as EV's, because over the last decade, FC numbers are still virtually nothing .... with not a single one of them actually purchasable by the public .... even as electric car ownership continues to grow
.

 

Just for reference: AVG cost of electricity in Japan 26c/kWh.

With electricity costs at my locale in Hybrid vs EV (Tesla vs Prius) the break even point is $3.1/gal. Anything less and EV costs more to fuel.

At Japan break would be ~$4.9/gal.

 

Agreed, they aren't practical for all. Neither are pick up trucks or compact cars.

Incentives helped get hybrids into a larger market share, and they are helping lower battery prices for plugins.

There is a chance I might drive off road, a much better one, and I might need to drive my extended family on an outing. I, and everyone else, really should be driving a large SUV 4x4, just in case.

All cars are tools. A sledge hammer is impractical for putting up molding, and so would be a jewelers hammer for demo work. A BEV can't do everything a petrol car can. It doesn't have too. What it can do, it can do better than a petrol. Since most households have more than one car, and one of those cars isn't being used for anything beyond a BEV limits, they are worth pursuing.

The limits of range and ability to charge do limit the potential customer base. We don't need everybody to buy one for them to have impact on the nation's gasoline consumption though.

Then PHVs can nearly do it all.

The higher cost of the car aside, FCV's have too many potentials in refueling right now to warrant commercialization at this time. It's like pushing DVDs to replace VHS with BluRay just a year away. I'll just stick to examples that have a chance to coming to market soon. The tank pressure standard is currently 70MPa, and that is presumably what the California stations are being built too. Japan has been building their stations to 82MPa since 2004. The Mirai tank is rated for that, and it is likely that is what Japan's standard will become next year. It may also become the standard in Europe. Then a Dutch group demonstrated a water then hydrogen filling method that could be more efficient.

Just the higher pressure standard would require investing to improve stations. The water one would also need changes to the cars. The farther out FCVs that could use methanol or natural gas directly would make any hydrogen infrastructure obsolete.

 

forgive me for asking, but can you actually drive one from South OC, SoCal to the Flathead Valley, MT in one day? it takes about 18hr in Prius.

With respect to sheer numbers, how many beanie babies were sold? 300,000 or perhaps more? was good investment at some point.

 

....Japan must be liking the lower current oil prices though

 

let me help reel you back to relevance .... because averaging 63mph from south OC to Kalispell - even in 20hrs - presumes minimum bathroom breaks - NO traffic passing thru Vegas - no snow/rain storms - no construction detours ... all of which quickly winds the drive out to 22 hours, easy ... from experience. Forgive me for asking - can you drive from south OC to Kalispell in 6hrs? Then why didn't you just jump on a Delta flight that stops in Salt Lake City - have lunch there... then do the 2nd leg of the flight in <3 more hours ... and be done with it - save yourself the long drive /hotel cost - or save yourself the danger of staying awake on a 20hr drive. The last time I did that drive was 9yrs ago ... & that was only to get our spare car relocated back here. Is that why you buy a car? .... for making an insanely long drive that you might only do once a decade? And why do some people continue to focus on the <1% driving minority, as some kind of reason why EV's are impractical? It's like saying, it's stupid to buy any car - because you can't drive it from Hawaii to the UK. Forgive me for asking - what do hearers of such wild questions think, when they hear such wild questions?
.

 

Post #67 is about all car users commute pattern, not EV-only. You are acting as a blind person, but do not count on me as your seeing dog.

 

Uh, some of us have driven very long distances in single days:

• ~600 miles - Huntsville AL - Canton OH, ~12 hrs each way, airplane inspection
• ~600 miles - Huntsville AL - Canton OH, ~20 hrs average, towing airplane
• ~700 miles - Huntsville AL - Madison WI, once, ~14 hrs each way, advocacy
• ~715 miles - Huntsville AL - Washington DC, twice, ~12 hrs each way, advocacy
  
• ~750 miles - Huntsville AL - Coffeyville KS, twice, ~14 hrs each way, family
• ~750 miles - Huntsville AL - Kansas City, once, ~14 hours each way, family
• ~800 miles - Fort Worth TX - Huntsville AL, pickup Prius, ~28 hours, sleep-over
• ~850 miles - Huntsville AL - Columbia, SC, ~24 hours, pickup traction battery
  
• ~1000 miles - Huntsville AL - Sanford NC, ~24 hours, loop via TN and back via Atlanta, pickup rims, spare inverter

Not everyone can handle endurance trips but many areas are poorly served by air travel. So pick two:

• Good - Prius is quiet and low vibration; prefer to be alone; unlimited baggage
• Fast - trip to/from airports; gate waits; transfers ... it adds up!
• Cheap - HSV has high air fares; still need rental, $40/day, at destination

Bob Wilson

 

my daughter takes the train from manhattan to boston. it's about 5 hours door to door, costs about the same as a flight, and takes about the same amount of time. driving would be faster and cheaper, especially in a prius.

 

I'm not clear Bob, he didn't say "no one" makes those types of trips, he said very few (1%).

In my entire life, I have made two 13 hour drives and a half dozen 11-12 hour ones.
All of those happened to be in an EV

The number of people that do this is a small percentage of drivers. No, I'm not saying zero, but it is very small.

Saying that, in general, EVs are not practical because they can't perform these types of trips is like saying the Prius is not practical because it can't haul 1500 pounds of materials in its hatch.

Both statements are silly, it is always a matter of the best tool for the job, and just because a particular vehicle can't perform a specific task, which is uncommon, rare or unique, doesn't mean it isn't practical in general.
It just means it isn't practical for that specific use.

 

And we agree:

I grew up in Oklahoma and my parents thought it important to visit almost every town in the state, in the 1950-60s. If you grow up taking long distance trips, it becomes second nature. But I can understand not everyone has this background. Still, we have gotten good value from both Prius that turned out to be excellent, cross-country rides compared to the gassers we had before.

We have two Prius, the 2003 is my daily commute car. The 2010 is our cross-country car. When the 2003 finally fails in a way I don't want to replace ... assuming I'm still working ... the Leaf is high on my list. But the 2003 gets 52 MPG so I have a hard time replacing it when there is little incremental improvement in the cost of ownership.

Bob Wilson

 

Excellent data points Bob as always. My parents took us on a long car trip around every other year. My brother tried with his kids and they simply didn't like it. Still let's look at today's choices for someone taking three long trips a year.

Big SUV can do it and has lots of room, but burns lots of gas on the highway.
Most Hybrids and diesels make an excellent choice, and can easily refill and get good mileage on the highway.
Plug-in hybrids work fine, although your choice is more limited.
Short range bevs can do it but are a pain on such a trip.

What about a long range bev? That seems fine too as long as its a tesla and the charging network has been built out for your trip. The shortest range tesla is 240 miles. Say you average recharging at 30 miles and charge to 80% (192) in 30 minutes, you will average 162 miles a charge. In cold weather you may want to take an hour for a full charge. If you start with a full charge you only have to stop 5 times for half an hour for a 1000 mile trip. Many people that drive tesla's would take that trade of these extra 2 hour of rest stops versus buying the 20 gallons of gas for a prius. If toyota is right with speeding these things up to 300 miles in 12 minutes they will be even better for lng trips.

Fuel cell car? Forgettabout it. You can't drive a 1000 miles unless you have a hydrogen truck behind you. 20 years from now maybe but I doubt it. 10 years from now, no plans to build enough hydrogen stations to do your trip or any other reasonable 1000 mile road trip.

Long trips are another disadvantage of fcv versus plug-ins. Its the expensive infrastructure.

This is probably only important to a small percentage <5% of likely plug-in drivers. It seems very important to people that hate plug-ins. hmm

 

Growing up, we would drive down from NJ to Florida for the family vacation once a year. For that trip we took a full size sedan or minivan, and never the Super Beetle my dad had for his commute.

Focusing on the ocassional long distance trip, or what a minority of the population drives daily, and judging BEV impractical is misguided. It is the inverse of the logic that has lead to people buying large SUVs and trucks for single person commuters. They might need the vehicle's full capabilities once a year though to get mulch. The Prius has a payload of just eight hundred and something pounds, and Toyota says no towing. It is an impratical car for those that actually use a truck. That doesn't mean it is impractical for the rest of the driving public.

Only 5% of the US population have what is defined as a long commute. That is a commute that is greater than 90 minutes, or longer than 50 miles, with some being both. That means up to 95%(97% if you count those with a 90+ minute commute, but under 50 miles) of the population has the potential of using a BEV for daily driving. https://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/pdf/poster_megacommuting_in_the_u.s.pdf

That potential is cut right now by the number of work places offering employee charging. If the next gen Leaf manages 150 mile range by EPA, that will no longer be the case, but 30 miles one way is a likely cut off for current BEVs for consideration. With the average commute distance being under 13 miles(FHWA - 2010 Conditions and Performance: Executive Summary ), that still leaves a good size majority for which a BEV might work. Those with one or no car are very unlikely to get a BEV, but those households are outnumbered by the ones with two or more vehicles. They just need home charging access, which is likely good for those with 2 or more cars.

Basically, the people that could potentially use a BEV outnumber those that absolutely cannot due to their commute distance. Most households will still require a second vehicle for the BEV to work for them. Price is an issue, but those are coming down.

 

Yes, they are gangsters and you are an artist at deceiving and brainwashing and your mision in this forum is to manipulate public opinion.
I even coloured sarcastically "green" the name of the new TVA nulear plant and you effectively steered the discussion to TVA closing down coal plants and blablabla. Interesting how, nobody else even bothered to check it out. Seems like, this forum trusts you blindly. You want to defraud people, to believe that grid power is getting cleaner, while, TVA proudly presents their new nuclear power station in the making, on their official site! As long as there is even one nuclear plant connected to grid, grid power will never be clean energy, just only the most lethal for the environment.
and then you will reply that TVA site does not mention anything related and I am talking BS, so everyone here will believe you. So I post the link for those, who are still able to move the mouse pointer over the link and press the appropriate click button.
TVA: Watts Bar Unit 2

 

Tennessee Valley Authority to close 8 coal-fired power units - The Washington Post

Those that believe that a nuclear plant is more environmentally damaging than a coal plant haven't been paying attention. For the same power output, a coal plant doses the nearby environment with about 100 times the radioactive dose emitted from a nuclear. That's in addition to the mercury and other heavy metals, sulfur, and combustion by-products. We need to do a better job of storing and recycling the waste from nuclear plants, but what we currently have is doing a better job of containing it than what we do for coal fly ash, that is loaded with the toxins that don't make it out of the smoke stack.
Coal Ash Is More Radioactive than Nuclear Waste - Scientific American

 

i think he's more into the meltdown scenario.

 

He IS a meltdown