Toyota Expects to Cut Cost of Fuel Cell System to 1/20

Have you actually tried it? The cost to setup and maintenance is crazy.

People had a lot of issues with their refueling station breaking down. Nothing like plugging an EV charging station. And if it breaks, you can just buy another and plugin another (assuming you willing to spend to install a 22o plug). Or worst, use the 110v that comes with the car.

Try that with NG.

 

I was adding to your sarcasm. Actually the cost is an eye opener. I could put in a heck of solar panel setup for what some of those people paid.

 

The 1st & 2nd setence of this post says, "FCV would be for longer range capable electric vehicle. BEV would be for shorter range". USB, I respect your right to think hydrogen is 'real' . . . . but just SAYING BEV's are for short & hydrogen is for long, does not make it so. 1st, the hydrogen stations. Virtually none. So if both car types have a range of just under 300 miles (ie; tesla & the hyundai & clarity - the only 2 FC around) ... the EV's QC infrastructure (MUCH less expensive to set up than hydrogen) will get the EV across the country 'NOW' ... this year ... the next year .... and the next & the next. Hydrogen? Not so. you can't really go any farther then the hand full of hydrogen stations. So if you have a safe FC range of 280 miles ... you can't go any farther than 130 or 140 miles - half of your hydrogen tank's range ... because you'd now be out of range of the next hydrogen station, or out of range to get back to the one you last filled up at.

And hydrogen is not electric ... it's natural gas ... because using electricity in stead of NG to distill hydrogen, is even more wasteful of energy then just distilling NG. All of which discounts it won't be here in it's limited form AT LEAST for another decade and a half. So, best to get all excited then . . . in about 15 years . . . maybe. But good luck with that. I hope they turn it around.
.

 

...do we need a separate FCV topic heading under the OTHER CARS section?

 

[

That slide with bev versus fcv was old and moldy. Toyota killed the EQ which had about is as much electric range as the volt, but was more expensive and didn't have an range extending ice. I guess from histories sake we can consider than toyota likes the smart ED and imev, which are second tier plug ins. Toyota has no bevs on the drawing board. Perhaps they will realize that the short range BEV doesn't sell well, and produce a bigger batteried phev, but we have no anouncements yet. The EQ is still on toyota's website. volt, leaf, etc sell much better than really small batteried bevs.

I thought they were against long range bevs altogether, saying only tesla can do it and its a tiny niche. Nissan and gm appear to be ready to have 150+ mile range bevs within the next 5 years, rumored as early as 2017. Then we will see if Toyota's - its only tesla - is true. We do have dealers against long range bevs, which is a hurdle for nissan and gm here.

The germans (mercedes, bmw, vw) all seem to be concentrating on phevs, but are doing bevs for compliance and small niches. Perhaps only tesla and nissan will find sucess with full bevs, and the other car companies will produces phevs. I don't even know how to judge sucess of fcv by volume at this point. For the next decade there appears to be a market for the bevs, but fcv are still at a pre commercial phase. For reference toyota has said that it will sell less than 2500/year for 2015 and 2016 in the US. Japan with possibly higher incentives may buy more.

 

FCV only covers all range in what << 1% of the world, those with hydrogen fueling stations where they drive? FCV is not a choice for either of us or most prius chat members. Pip has limited distribution, hopefully they will change that but ....

at least we have a name
Toyota Said to Plan Mirai as Name for New Fuel-Cell Car - Bloomberg
mirai (future)

 

Mirai.

Is that plural for Mirage?

 

I'd hope it was a JDM name which will probably be changed for the World market.

We get a lot of RHD JDM cars here in the UK and some of the domestic names are strange to say the least; Nissan Cedric anyone? or A Mazda Bongo Friendee?

But with the Vauxhall Adam, I think strange names are not exclusive to Japan

Nissan Cedric - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Mazda Bongo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Opel Adam - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

You thought I was serious?

It was a joke.

Since plural for Prius is called Prii, so Mirai is plural for Mirage. [You know, bad marketing name from the get go, like Nova in Latin America? :lol: ]

 

Where are these plug ins? The Rav4 EV is cancelled, and the next PPI is coming out a year after the release of the next Prius. Toyota still hasn't expanded the sales area of the current PPI, nor does appear to have any plans to do so. Are they still making the eQ for other markets? I'm not taking their FCEV as evidence of not supporting plug ins. I'm taking their tepid entry into the plug in market as evidence for it.

Nissan has not intended the Leaf as a compliance car, and has had some success with it. So I don't know what break through Toyota is exactly waiting for on the plug in front? If they want to be the Johnny come lately to plug ins like others were with hybrids, then that is their choice.

 

seriously, I hope this statement is not trying to suggest that hydrogen cars are run on renewables while EV's are run on coal. Because imo that sounds like what the FC car promoters seem to try to get folks to swallow.
In essence, the FC lobby does NOTHING, except suck up CARB credits, wasts taxpayer $$$, & assures the auto & fossil fuel industry will continue to keep us addicted to their same ol same ol carbon fuel products.
.

 

Even if carbon fuel is not involved (assuming future fuel cell), they still do not want you to make them yourselves and cut them off. You can make your own electricity with reasonable cost, but would you spends $100k+ to install a fuel cell station? So you pay them. This is really "Who killed the electric car" part 2... or they hope to be.

 

This number doesn't mean much. It is looking into the rear view mirror. Even though people like to think the actions of one person matter (like a drop in the bucket) it ISN'T true. "One" person driving an EV or a FCEV will make no different to climate change or the smog in LA. What will make a change is MILLIONS of such actions.

This means that we have to look at what this delta (in the future) does to the mix of grid power. So, starting at 67% coal+NG or 95% hardly matters. If we had to prepare for a few million new EV drivers in X years, how do we think the mix changes? Do we add more coal? Do we add more NG? Do we add more solar/wind, etc?

IMO, if we were to add more coal, it is a negative. If we add more NG how is this different than using NG for FCEV? I think, no matter what, we are pretty much on a trajectory to decrease coal (replace with NG) and to add more solar/wind/NG. And there are a couple of new nuclear plants in planning (building?) but is probably about a wash with some nukes going offline. Hydro is probably ~constant.

So all "new" electric capacity (thus for EV use) is some combination of NG/solar/wind. While all FCEV will be NG only. EVs seem to win the forward-looking incremental way of looking at it.

Mike

 

Japan's Prime Minister likes Toyota FCV's pickup, zero emissions