Featured Toyota chief speaks out on EVs

You were trying to shift the discussion to the US market and claiming the car was niche in an effort to diminish what a major auto company was doing for affordable BEVs. I pointed out the VW did know their audience with what they are choosing to bring to the US.

Since that distraction didn't work, you move to making claims of rhetoric being used. The details of what I brought up have been discussed on Prius chat.

You're the one claiming 9 years is too short a time for car companies to shift to EV production, when not even Japan called a complete ICE ban in that time.

There are car companies preparing for mass EV production. There will be turmoil, but not the complete doom Toyoda might be implying.

 

Therein lies the irony ... Toyoda-san claiming EV's are too expensive ... yet Toyota continues to lobby for more & more taxpayer money to build even higher costing hydrogen infrastructure, which is even MORE expensive than EV infrastructure ... as well as more & more taxpayer money to subsidize the expensive hydrogen cars - roughly double the cost of several EV's that are available. Yet he 'claims' he's 'concerned' ... yea, he's concerned alright. He's concerned he can't stop the tsunami of (much cheaper than hydrogen cars) EV's from rolling over Toyota - caught with their pants down - with nothing to offer the world, & only able to build enough for China, which they only do so they can continue to sell ANYTHING in China.
Thus, he resorts to fear mongering & false advertising that EV's take 4 hours to recharge.
.

 

No. It's just the same old game of twisting what I posted to keep the discussions active. Back on ignore.

 

Calling something a "same old game" or calling something "twisting"? The terms game & twisting are conclusory. WHY is this a game ... why is this conclusory. From your earlier post;

So ... if someone for example disagrees with understanding a concept;

the statement - "self-charging" has nothing to do with "they didn't want to see PHEV in the same category"
PHEV is not the same category as a hybrid.
"self-charging" commercials were not even directed at PHEV's. "self-charging" was anti-EV marketing, saying that a hybrid charges itself (ie; so you don't have to, as their commercial says, waste 4 hours charging).
Care to clarify? .... (false) ads about 4 hours to kill (to charge) how that's not the real "twisting"? or "confusing" or "ill intent"? Isn't that Toyoda-san pushing back at lost market share?
"pushback"? yes, if anyone claims Toyota had a benign purpose for ads depicting "self-charging" as anything less than (your term)
"spin to confuse"? yes, saying a car is "self-charging" when (as previously noted) many haven't even heard of cars that charge?

Clarity reveals ill intent? How does clarity reveal anything but clarity. If anyone connects "self-charging" to PHEV's when the marketing is clear it's directed to & about hybrids, and that clarified ... that's NOT ill intent. It just clarity.
"Antagonists"? If clarity antagonizes, it's not the fault of the clarifier nor is clarity a way to confuse.

running ads about "self-charging" cars could very well be intending to confuse, or it could very well be construed as focusing on NOT charging. But PHEV's do plug in, so the ad is not being directed at PHEV's. See? no ill intent.
.

 

Norway Asserts Lexus "Self-Charging Hybrid" Is A Lie (cleantechnica.com)

 

I'm not saying you don't have facts or expericence, I am saying you choose the wrong metrics. Most of your posts on this are misleading

You are saying the battery (480 kg for the long range battery (350 mile epa) in a model 3 weighs a lot more than the 5.6 kg of hydrogen and 90 kg expensive carbon fiber tank(400 mile toyota estimate) in the 2021 mirai. That is true as far as it goes. I don't know what the fuel cell, plumbing, battery, protection shell each weigh, but obviously if you have a 135 mpge bev it doesn't need to hold the same amount of energy as a 70 mpge fuel cell vehicle to go as far. After the balance the fuel cell vehicle is over 100 kg more. Explain to us how the heavier vehicle is better because the fuel and tanks weigh less. For the car designers the volume and the pressure are a problem.

Do you think the mirai, clarity, nexo fuel cell are all awful designs and all could lose 1000 lbs if only you designed them. Toyota has been working on this thing since the early 90s. Go ahead design and build it at a price that toyota can sell it, and I'll believe you.


Did you just ignore that I included the rav4 prime in the comparison? Other than toyota not having capacity to make batteries for the demand of the rav4 prime I don't see how running that on methanol would not be better than a mirai on hydrogen. Refueling on a fuel cell car is much worse today and in the forseable future than a tesla in the US and any plug-in in europe or china. Perhaps in Japan it will be better. Fueling is a disadvantage for 10,000 psi hydrogen versus bev.

Mercedes did make the phev fuel cell vehicle that you are talking about.
Daimler ends hydrogen car development because it's too costly - Electrek.

Trucks may be able to work but not likely with 700 bar hydrogen. Northwestern this year came up with a storage breakthrough. Maybe in 5 years they can have smaller tanks that don't require high pressures that can solve part of the problem. The 101 funded stations are plenty to test any new car. DOE and University of Texas and Toyota are working on lowering the price of renewable hydrogen. They will be using it to fuel a small fleet of mirai and a super computing center. It seems better investment than building even more hydrogen stations for cars that are not really desirable.

 

Don't think so.

As I keep saying, these cars should be PHEVs.

They wouldn't be if they were well-designed.

yes.

Show me one that's a PHEV.

Do you know where methanol comes from? Do you know how dangerous it is?

Only because of lack of infrastructure. Refueling a BEV is a maddening experience most people won't tolerate unless it's at home.

In production?

On-highway trucks are fine as BEVs. Cars are not.

 

I did. The mercedes f-cell GLC. It was only leased and rented in germany. Ford, Nissan, and Mercedes all pooled their patents to design it. Mercedes this year decided manufacturing was too expensive - twice as much as a bev. I gave you the link. Yes they produced 100s of them. They just discontinued them this year. People liked their bevs and phevs better.

I showed you mine, now you show me yours. Where is that light fuel cell vehicle that is safe that weighs 800 lbs less than a bev.

Yes I do. Do you know how hydrogen is made? Somehow the successful California and Chinese experiments as well as racing with methanol as fuel didn't bring up big safety concerns. Did you know that green methanol can be made and distributed much less expensively than green hydrogen? Like hydrogen most methanol today is made from natural gas because it is less expensive lots of renewable methanol being made today. Read up, maybe you will learn something.
Full Page Reload

btw - I have been to the renewable methanol facility mentioned, as well as SMR hydrogen production facilities.

I know I saw that toyota commercial saying it took 4 hours.

Unfortunately there are millions of bev drivers that find charging more convient. I'm one of them. I've spent about 3 hours in the last 2 years charging at superchargers. I have no idea how many hours I've saved not looking for gas stations, refueling on the road, etc. There are phevs for those with differt travel patterns.

California has had hydrogen disruptions in each of the last 3 years. Now you say we should pay to build a lot more despite your claim all the current fcv are deeply flawed. What sense does that make.

You go ahead. I know my state government in texas is never going to tax us enough to build infrastructure out. So would say hydrogen is less convent than bevs because its too expensive. Tesla is now upgrading to 250 kw chargers where I can gain 170 miles in 20 minutes. That is fast enough for me, in fact the current slower chargers are fast enough since I mainly charge in my garage.

 

I just point out to you that the majority don't accept your fanatic defense of Toyota.

Rephrasing the self-charging ads as an education attempt that EV can apply to non -plug ins held no water. You admitted the general public wouldn't care, leaving the ads targeting enthusiasts. Who would already have the knowledge.

Pointing out the existence of the ID.3 defied Toyoda's claims of shifting to EVs now would destroy the auto industry and your defense of him. So first it was nonacceptance of the low price, and then bringing up a market they aren't sold in.

Calling you out on these actions was my crime, not in twisting anything.

 

. . . or ... he really IS (as he continually reminds us) smarter than all the manufacturers of hydrogen cars in the industry.

Wow before advertising their defeat, throwing in the towel - Mercedes claims to have spent over 3 decades futilely trying to achieve regular car cost parity - before realizing it was a fool's game. Also from the article;

too bad mr. Leejay doesn't volunteer to go show all these manufacturers giving up, the error of their ways - as he still believes he knows more than all of them. He could explain to all of them how batteries suck because they are heavy and then they will believe it & and put a much larger (sucky) one in fuel cell cars. and it will be more cost effective than EV's too. (shaking head)
.

 

OK, sure.
When you run all the numbers, comparing walkers to bikers (including the manufacturing of the bike) make sure to include the energy used at the farm, and a portion of the manufacturing for the large farm equipment used to grow the extra calories for the walker. By comparison, a basic bike is very simple and can be easily maintained for many decades.

Mike

 

You forgot to mention the food requirements for the miners who mined the ore for the bike, the people who transported the materials ,the smelters, the people who built the manufacturing equipment and plant for the bike facility, the people who work at bike manufacturing facility, the salesforce, rubber manufacturers, tire manufacturers, assemblers etc.

Many in less populated states grow much of their own food and their food chains are local. Depending on where you live and lifestyle an individual may not be a part of a traditional consumer food chain

Another point of view rather than having to be right might be to say - that is interesting I never thought of taking into account the whole process for manufacturing a bike- the natural resources it uses and the intensive labor it involves not to mention the overwhelming expenditures in energy, natural resources and manpower to manufacture an automobile.

Let me try. I don't have to be right and it is an interesting point of view to take into account the food chain and if you buy from a facility the amount of energy and resources it take to get that food there and in the hands of consumers. A walker taps into those resources to get the energy they need.

That didn't hurt me at all and allowed my to consider another point of view!

 

What is it with you and trunk space? Have you seen a 1970’s Caddie trunk, compare it to most new cars, it was enormous. We have all survived since then with smaller vehicle trunks.

What happens??

 

Are you that clueless?

Part of the drive to SUVs is because of the cargo space. Hybrid sedans were a tough sell for generations because of the loss of cargo space. There are threads here about the loss of space in the Prius Prime.

The entire point of developing quick refueling hydrogen was to have the car's as convenient to use on trips as gasoline cars. Midsize sedans have trunk space around 15 cubic feet. Nine cubic feet is a serious loss, making the Mirai less useful in the area it is supposed to beat BEVs in.

Don't know. No supporter of hydrogen seems to want to answer the question.

Best case, the heat builds the pressure up until safety valves blow, and the hydrogen feeds the fire. Worst is the tank burns until too weak to contain the pressure and explodes.

 

Well, since this is Priuschat, most of “We” have had larger cargo areas.

 

no we haven't ....... if you want to simply survive - you can find one of many cardboard boxes - streets of LA. Yet some plugin drivers choose, or actually need more cargo room, thank you very much.



Yea, the hydrbomb needed a much bigger platform (for many) to put those 3 tanks in. A pickup, SUV or minivan could easily carry a moped & spare gas with you so if/when you accidentally go past the hydrogen halfway range, you won't have to wait for a flatbed to come & take your car back to where it can get refilled.

.

 

Prius has a large trunk, Model 3 not so large, yet it is selling. Most individuals that are buying a Model 3 have additional vehicles. Same is said for the Mirai.

 

These three points are sort of correct, but as I recall, most of the people around here with SUVs and crossovers don't really use the extra space nor the extra seats. Most of those who bought extended cab pickups in the 90's and 00's almost never put anything in the bed. Why have they been selling so well? Simple; the salesmen needed some way to get people out of their sedans and into a new vehicle. So they sell the idea that a small car is less safe, and they sell the idea that you need to be able to carry a little league team and so on. My Prius prime has a LOT more room for cargo than the 2002 Gen 1 that I used for most of 2 decades. I had forgotten how much I enjoyed a hatchback and fold down seats. Yet I managed to enjoy the 2002 model with the small trunk and even smaller trunk opening.

If there are threads about the loss of space, it's because of idle minds needing something to nit-pick. After all, I don't recall a single one of those posts that gave exact dimensions of the space that they needed for their particular cargo. Someone said "can it fit a bike" as if all bikes are one size. Someone said that the floor was too high without saying what the proper floor depth should be. It's a flaw without an impact. I assert that the only ones who can say that they are "loosing storage space" when buying a Prius Prime is a person currently owning the same model in the conventional configuration IF they have luggage or other gear that barely fits.

That sounds like the same question that goes with every power source. Some things do not behave well when heat and flame are applied. I suspect that trollbait typed that question from a PC that was connected to an electric line that was not properly protected from direct lighting strikes at the point of entry. What happens to his PC when 300 million Volts and about 30,000 Amps surge find the lithium battery in his laptop. It would probably be a lot more exciting than a hydrogen flare when the tank's safety valve vents to the atmosphere.

Dan

 

So orenji, please tell us, what is the trunk capacity of the Model 3 and how much larger than the Mirai?

 

My Camry has 15 cubic feet of trunk space, and I've completely filled it for trips. The Model 3 has 13 cubic feet, at worst(unclear how front trunk is counted), in the rear trunk. That is 2 more small to medium sized pieces of luggage than the new Mirai can hold. People have taken their Model 3's on trips. It and the Camry also have fold down rear seats for longer items.

There are two cases in which the fast fill times of hydrogen is important. One of those is for saving time on long trips. Such trips usually involve carrying additional stuff. If the car can't carry it all for the trip, having the fast fill doesn't matter as a benefit.

American families have always wanted a car to haul all their stuff. Before the rise of SUVs, there were full size wagons. Before becoming uncool, there were more minivans. SUVs are just tall wagons, that also are easier to get in and out of with a higher seating position.

The size comparison here is about the Mirai's trunk. It is 4 to 6 cubic feet smaller than other cars in its size class. That's 30 to 45 gallons. FCEVs are presented as no compromises compared to BEVs. The space loss is a big compromise.

As for the Prius Prime, the real issue for the lost cargo space is that it because of an unprofessional packaging of the battery. It looks like an aftermarket conversion. Toyota could have done much better.

On a practical note, the raised floor puts a limit on what can fit below the seat backs, and makes blocking the rear view more likely.

I use a phone or desktop, but thanks for caring.

We are told that hydrogen is safe, despite evidence to the contrary, without explanation beyond "it'll dissipate". This is just more of that behavior.

Most car fires start as an electric one in the 12 volt system, and the plastics through out the car can provide plenty of fuel. The carbon fiber of the tanks themselves can be a fuel.

The pressure these tanks are at alone can do a lot of damage in an uncontrolled release. Vehicle fires happen, and hydrogen car will be in one eventually. Wanting to know what has been done to reduce the risk a full hydrogen tank poses in such an event is reasonable.