Toyota Shows Distain: Even for their Own RAV4-EV

Uh, the name Didier Stevens does NOT sound very Japanese-ish to me!

 

Looking up the name, he's in Brussels, Belgium and is the Senior Manager for Government Affairs for Toyota Motor Europe. I imagine the cultural aversion in Japan to nuclear power is a core component behind Toyota's direction, but it's unsurprising that the entire global conglomerate would stand with the same position.

 

Since electricity generation is still dirty(fossil fuel and nuclear) and environmentally harmful(hydro dams) in areas, we will focus on cars that only directly burn fossil fuels or hydrogen stripped from said fuels.At least until the electricity is 100% clean and acceptable to us before we commit to plug ins. Gotcha

 

I think its interesting to see what Toyota is saying about fuel cells in Europe. The most promising country is Germany for fuel cells, which has easy access to coal, but not natural gas or oil. Price for hydrogen is about 9 euro a kg, diesel is 6.4 euros a gallon. Here is Der Spiegel pretty much reporting the toyota line on fuel cells from 6 months ago, but then asking some important questions.
Toyota Develops New Fuel-Cell Car - SPIEGEL ONLINE

What about Tesla?

Toyota is possitioning bevs as only for eco-snobs, and rich people in california. Funny, I see lots of teslas and leafs in Austin, maybe the move to texas will change their minds. OK so what will the fcv cost for the masses?

That may be a problem. BMW's i3 with range extender is about $45,000. If Tesla's blue star likely to sell for under $40k in 2018 is only for eco-snobs in california, how will this $50,000-$100,000 car sell? In the US the only place the fuel cell vehicle will sell is california. Hmm maybe it is because fuel cell vehicles are so much better to fuel, take it toyota.

OK. so who is going to build those stations in europe?

Sounds like its the toyota fcv for hydrogen snobs in california, Germany, and Japan, until toyota or someone else gets the price down and we build lots of renewables. This may happen in 20 year, or 30 years, or never. It certainly is not 2015.

 

I'd gladly take all of the cars today running on coal electricity instead of oil / LNG. That would take care of a lot of countries ruined by easy oil-dollars. Having all of the cars run on electricity only boosts demand by ~15%.

The coal problem needs to be fixed, but adding cars to the coal problem (or removing cars from the coal problem) does not change the magnitude of the solution needed.

 

Toyota still doesn't seem to understand that the environment is not the only thing that sells EVs.

I wonder if people consider their comment of "Eco snobs" is as offensive as Lutz's "geek mobile" was about the Prius?

 

Biohydrogen wouldn't require water-splitting by electrolysis, and is "green", and renewable. Its problem, as I understand it anyway, is that it doesn't scale up to the yields and rates needs for economic consumption (the algae that can be tricked into producing it only do so in order to use it as a catalyst for their normal production of oxygen, which, once produced, prevents further production of the hydrogen--when the algae are subjected to an environment that can make them produce t continuously, it eventually "stresses" them until they die or just stop).

The problem with hydrogen thus, isn't the hydrogen itself but the means of producing it. Everyone keeps assuming it'd be the established methods for producing it, which are obviously not scalable to complete mass adoption. Electrolysis just makes it a shitty temporary storage medium.

 

Sounds like two little squabbling brats calling each other names, don't it?

 

It does at that.

 

I just saw a Lexus ad on youtube where they say

"Electric cars hold you back" (image of Leaf with 4 hour recharge time) "Lexus hybrids do not."

So much for the apology.... Toyota is continuing its same anti-EV behavior.

 

Oh eco-snob wasn't lutz, it was Toyota's saga, and he said it in japanese, and eco-snob is the translated version. He was saying bevs were for eco-snobs, but hydrogen for the masses. He is 63, and toyota has been working on fuel cells over 20 year, with 500 engineers currently. He does sound a lot like lutz though.

Someone at cleantechnica seemed to put out some numbers that seem to say the opposite of toyota's on fuel cell efficiency and ghg versus plug-ins
Severe Issues with Fuel Cell Vehicle GHG Emissions Claims and Hydrogen Refueling Infrastructure Grants | CleanTechnica

Now that if true seemed like some clear conflicts of interest, and fudged numbers on the side of those in the california government pushing public funding of fuel cells.

Hey if they get fuel cells to work on honest numbers and private funding, or even on the first 68 stations more power to them. But if the real numbers show that these claims are fraudulent, lets cut off the funds.

 

Here is more ammo:
Toyota cheers plan for U.S. hydrogen stations | The Japan Times

 

Of course they are cheering, they got tax payers to fund more of their R&D. Yah! Corporate Welfare! Now of the US taxpayer money, GM and Chyrsler have taken more, but I think toyota is number 3 ahead of ford.

Of course sometimes you should hate the game not the player, or the organization that created the game. CARB has set the rules so that if Toyota just stands aside and BEVs take off, then its going to have to pay nissan or tesla money for the carb credit rules. So first thing is to bash BEVs so that maybe the rules will change, again. Last time they got fuel cells from 7 to 9 credits, and battery switch BEVs from 7 to 4 credits. Winning. The prius phv = 0 credits, even the volt gets 0 credits. Now last I saw is volts were 75% miles electric, and actually in california traveled more electric miles per car than the leaf. Why does it get no credit? If you were to be fair, the CARB would lose power, and goals might not be so expensive on the taxpayers.

Toyota is playing the CARB ZEV game masterfully. Unfortunately it looks like when Mary Nicols and the California Fuel Cell Partnership wins, the bulk of california citizens lose. I don't live in the state anymore, but hopefully when this round of what is it $47m (small compared to $10B already spent) goes, I hope people judge carb harshly and end the conflicts of interests.

For toyota I really hope they are sucessful at reducing cost, and making a better fuel cell car. Who knows in 20 years fuel cells might be great range extenders on phevs We should call them out when they say they are cheaper and the taxpayer is paying $12K per fueling station + credits on the car + fuel subsidies + funding research. I mean toyota won't even tell us the price. Hyundai has, and toyota is likely to match them $499/mo including fuel and maintenance to lease, probably $50K to buy but won't include all that other stuff. That fiat 500e is $199/mo and includes 12 days a year of a gas car when you think there is not enough range. I bet toyota loses more money on each car than fiat. With those great new rules toyota can lose 3 times as much per car, sell 1/3 of the cars, the tax payer pays more each, car, and carb somehow thinks that fcv will be better for the environment.
Severe Issues with Fuel Cell Vehicle GHG Emissions Claims and Hydrogen Refueling Infrastructure Grants | CleanTechnica

 

I am skeptical about hydrogen fuel cells because H{2} is such wicked stuff. I'm OK with other fuels for fuel cells including converters that make H{2} in situ. I'm also OK with refractory temperature cells. Still, Toyota is conducting an experiment, much like the CARB rules that spawned the EV1 and were later changed to condone EV1 destruction(*). I don't have great expectations for members of our species . . . including myself.

What I haven't seen are Japanese sources advocating fuel cell cars for domestic consumption. At one time, I saw a posting that Honda was selling co-generation units for home use. I also understand there are methane fuel cell stacks used on some industrial facilities in California. Both are promising and I see them as the natural source to a practical, vehicle fuel cell. But they are not using H{2} feedstock and that is good.

Before I really understood how the Prius hybrid system, I held superstitions combining EV with Atkinson engine cycle. In reality, the car is much more and that is why it works so well. But before having an example, one in my hands, it would have been difficult, nearly impossible to understand the Prius drive train. So with 'lessons learned,' I'll remain curious about the Toyota fuel cell vehicle but mostly about how they handle H{2} feedstock. Heck, if their H{2} storage were hydride based, I would see a path that might work although there would still be a refueling time challenge.

I'm not so worried about the H{2} generation. Natural gas + live steam and you have the current commercial practice to making it. It is such a simple process, I could see it miniaturized for in situ generation. But I'm just an ordinary engineer constrained by my education in chemistry, mechanics, and electronics. Still, I am ready to be surprised by a 'better bunny.'

Bob Wilson

* - CARB judged and issued the 'death warrant' for the EV1. GM was just the enthusiastic executioner.

 

Hold on there..... what is this? I don't recall CARB ever opposing the EV1 or other electrics.

re: Your superstition about electric drive married to the Atkinson engine in the Prius..... .....Why? I've always thought the concept was simple. Downsized engine to save fuel (1.5 in prius, 1.0 in insight) plus an electric motor to provide assist in high-demand situations. What were your thoughts on why it would not work?

 

I believe he (bwilson4web) is referring to the GM Electric Vehicle-One (EV1), which was 100% batteries & electric motor, that GM "killed" (and crushed) when CARB changed their mind/rules.

 

Brings back memory!

BMW crushing ActiveE EVs, saving all batteries

 

I think we all know CARB is to blame for those too..

Plus the new i3s get anouther 3 credits ZEV We should be expecting honda will be crushing some fuel cell cars soon too, with the new clarity coming next year.