Toyota Shows Distain: Even for their Own RAV4-EV

They want american taxpayers to continue to help pay for their fuel cell experiment. I don't think this will work out well for toyota. Despite their lecturing about Tesla being impossible, and fueling infrastructure for plug-ins being high cost, the plug-in market will likely be large enough by the time they drop the cost of fuel cells, that their fuel cell vehicle will also have to be a plug-in. I am more mad at how they and gm took criminal actions to thwart the safety agencies than this FUD though.

 

its all about money. just hard for me to imagine what Toyota was thinking especially considering all the good will they had generated with the Prius. They were the underdog snubbed by the "SuperCar" group who went out on their own and developed an iconic car. They had the momentum and chose to veer off into Hydrogen land. it was as if they made their decisions while puffing on another gas...

 

I disagree. Toyota is not just thinking for the next few years ahead. Its perfectly reasonable for you guys to think about the next few years ahead since i'm sure you guys are thinking about your next car. Toyota is thinking about the next ten years and beyond. Yes, plug-ins will probably be more popular and more affordable, with more recharge stations available in now and in the near future. However, what Toyota offers is superior. Zero emissions, 3 minute refuel time and an EPA estimated 300 mile range. Tesla can't guarantee the first two things mentioned. Unless you are recharging your Tesla with something wind or solar powered, you're still using coal to recharge or something of that nature. Why would Toyota invest in plug-ins? I rather they invest more of their capital into something that is far superior that will be affordable and reasonable in time.

 

How much coal-fired electricity does it take to "power" those gas-to-hydrogen conversions?

Trading apples for oranges is still mixed-fruit.

 

huh. How does lying about how long it takes to charge a tesla, make you forward thinking.

Hey genius, toyota doesn't even have a car they are selling today. They claim these things for next year. If you have to drive 100 miles to find a hydrogen station, how long does it take to fill up. By the time any toyota fuel cell is for sale, tesla will have the country covered with super chargers. Toyota has 1 hydrogen station, it was subsidized by the tax payers, and isn't even open to the public. Do the math? Well less than 1% of the US population will get a 15 minute refueling with a fuel cell in the next 5 years. I call that a false benefit.

While a majority of tesla's are charged with fossil fuel free sources - solar, wind, hydro, nuclear, toyota is proposing all of the hydrogen is going to come from fossil sources.

I really don't care what they invest in. Sure do the development for fuel cells. But its really dishonest to lie that fuel cells are more efficient or more convient than plugging your car in to you solar or wind powered garage.

 

Lol someone has to calm down. Name calling already? Expecting Toyota to have nationwide hydrogen stations in a year is a little hypocritical don't you think?

 

Is it hypocritical to think that Toyota should be investing some of their capital in a hydrogen refueling structure if they truly believe in such FCEVs instead of having us tax payers do it?

Yes, Tesla didn't have their Supercharger network completely up before they sold their first S, but there is an important fact that doesn't make hypocritical to call for Toyota to do the same. Tesla's cars do not need a Supercharger station to refuel. The majority of these cars, and other plug-ins, charging is done at the owners' home.

Fuel cell cars on the other hand need a hydrogen refueling station. The only available public ones in the nation are in southern California. While these cars can refuel in 3 minutes, they have a tighter tether to the local area than any BEV out there. It will be a hassle, and require good planning, but there is nothing stopping a Leaf from going cross country. It might even have already have been done.

It will take billions to build a hydrogen refueling system across the country, and when finished, vehicle vehicle fuels might be using natural gas or methanol directly. Making the hydrogen system obsolete. A high population of plug in cars will also require large sums of money invested in the infrastructure. Most of that investment would go upgrades and repairs that the grid is past due for.

As a range extender for a plug in, a fuel cell would make a clean and efficient one. They also won't need as many hydrogen stations. The non-plug FCEVs will require as hydrogen stations as there are gasoline stations to support them as a component of the fleet.

 

Its not name calling if its true is it? I mean they say plane out it takes 4 hours to charge a car, then show a charger that will put 170 miles in a tesla in 30 miles, or a full charge in an hour. The words don't match the picture, which for those of us normal americans is a lie.

I don't expect toyota to have the nation covered with hydrogen stations ever, but Toyota implies that the whole US will be better served by hydrogen than plug-ins. Well if you don't have tunnel vission, that is not forward thinking of toyota, its ignoring the bulk of the country and focusing on southern California as if that is all that mattered.

 

Yes, Toyota's 100 year plan is just to only cover California with hydrogen stations. Yup, thats exactly what they plan to do. They have tunnel vision. If you can't see why Toyota only has one station in California for the time being. I can't help you. Well have a good day time to get back to work.

 

1) Toyota "made" the Hybrid vehicle happen...regardless of Detroit's half-hearted and initial failures.
2) Toyota wants to "make" Fuel Cells happen...
3) Rome wasn't made in a day, nor will Toyota's FCEV, but they have a long-term goal to aim for...what do the other guys have?

 

The Honda Clarity and the Mercedes F-cell have(or had) both been available for lease in S. Ca. for a few years now. The Hyundai Tucson FCEV as also been available in Europe leases. It might even be available for sale there. It will be leasable with the others soon. A lease fee is listed on their site, which is more info than what Toyota has given for there Lexus FCEV price.

The cars are lease only in part because hydrogen stations can not legally charge for hydrogen at this time in Ca. So the lease price includes fuel, but it also hides how much the hydrogen is costing per kg from the public.

GM is not sitting idle in the fuel cell field. I believe they actually hold the most patents concerning FCEV at this time. They have accepted the reality that FCEVs are still a ways off from consumer use, and even with government handouts, will cost a bundle. So they have partnered with Honda to defray those costs.

Now how precisely will Toyota make FCEVs happen? What is their exact plan? We know Tesla's plan. Start at the high end of the car spectrum, and use the profits to develop more and more affordable models. The free Supercharger network eases range anxiety, but their early models have the range to do everyday trips. Even without Superchargers or other fast EV chargers, the S could do a road trip by charging at RV parks. But the Supercharger network will be needed to serve road trips for the lower range models that might show up. By the time those models arrive the network will be well established.

What we know of Toyota's upcoming FCEV is that it will cost about as much as the Tesla S with lower performance and seating for only four. It won't have a plug, so it is stuck where ever the few hydrogen stations are. Building it out will take more cash and time than installing fast chargers for BEVs. Toyota, and the other car makers investing in fuel cells, has shown no plans to invest in hydrogen infrastructure. They want governments to foot the bill to expand the market for their products.

In small countries like Japan and the Northern European countries that have invested in a hydrogen infrastructure, these cars might be the future. The invest costs will be low, and those countries with high a percentage of renewable energy, the hydrogen can be made cleanly. Japan will likely make theirs from coal with the shying away from nuclear power.

With Japan, Germany, Sweden, and a few others investing in fuel cells, why does Toyota feel the need to release a FCEV in Ca? No other state seems interested in spending the money for the stations, and Toyota isn't doing so. Could it be for just the ZEV credits, which have been increased for FCEVs and decreased for some BEVs?

 

Well, in my best "Air"Jordan voice (and tennis shoes): Toyota seems to have a "...just DO it!" business-foresight plan.

 

Is that what I said? You said 10 years. 10 years is 2024. In 2005 the car companies pledged to have what tens of thousands of cars on the road today. Toyota was part of that. In 2024, we might have what 150 hydrogen fueling stations in this country, and all of those at tax payers subsidy. How is fuel cell a plan for the country that is going to be better than phev and bev in the next decade.

Will California's Hydrogen Highway Survive This Time Around? - Popular Mechanics

Why do you think car companies will keep promises this time on fuel cells? I mean I know why they didn't. It takes five technical breakthroughs for fuel cells to work. Since 2004 car companies have made techical progress, but plug-ins have done much better. It may be that fuel cells are simply too late.

Well if they really were serious would they not have put out a plan like tesla's plan to expand the network. Instead they are relying on auto registration fees and federal dollars to build these things instead of risking their own money. Public risk, private profit, and the risks are quite high that in 2025 whatever fuel cell toyota comes up with will be worse than then next tesla or phev. That is why toyota doesn't say they are buiding fueling stations, they no there is no way they will be profitable. Why should the public support toyota here, when they have plenty of places at home in japan and in germany to get their fuel cell vehicle right, before US taxpayers have to spend billions more.

So there you have it why I doubt Toyota is on firm footing when it says fuel cells will be more convient than plug-ins. Maybe if they get something going in 2040 they have a chance but that is not what they are advertising. This is the add again.

Now if toyota had something to sell do you think they would be going with such misleading advertisements.

 

Zero from the tailpipe, but not zero. The hydrogen has to come from somewhere.

Which is a nice benefit. But it is only a benefit for long road trips. Otherwise EV wins on nightly charging which only takes 30 seconds of effort since the car is sitting unused anyway.

Of course that is one specific, not shipping, vehicle.

The typical strawman against EVs. The real metric is to see where all new electrical generation is coming from as new power plants are added as more EVs are sold. Not too many new coal plants being built. Coal is being retired as more NG comes online (as well as solar and wind).
And you need to compare that to where the hydrogen comes from. Mostly it will be from NG so what is the difference? I'll tell you. The difference is that with EVs you are NOT locked into anything. You can get electricity from numerous sources today and tomorrow you can switch to somethig like solar (at home) easily. Once you start with hydrogen, you are building a lot of new expensive infrastructure that more rigidly locks you into a particular technology. And the end user has little control over it. Ever. You aren'y going to efficiently make H2 at home.

And H2 will always cost about the same (at best) or more than electricity per mile. If you use electrolysis to generate the H2 it will cost 3x to 5x as much.

Mike

 

Toyota has no plans to build any more hydrogen stations than they already have.
Their plan is for the taxpayers to build hydrogen stations and then give those same taxpayers the privilege of paying for the hydrogen.

 

They used to. I am no longer certain they still do.

 

These numbers may have something to do with it!

Toyota Prius Plug-in sales increase 190 percent in April in US : TreeHugger

 

One place to set up dispensers for hydrogen could be the places that sell industrial gases, since some of them already have hydrogen.

Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. - Manufacturer of industrial gases and specialty chemicals

 

I believe that is part of the reason the current stations are in S. Ca.
There are hydrogen pipelines servicing industrial customers in the US, but only about a thousand miles. Which are low pressure. Gasoline and natural gas pipelines are measured in the thousands of miles though.

Even then, gasoline still relies on barges, tank cars, and trucks to get everywhere it is used. Hydrogen has a lousy energy density per volume. So, such means of transport will add more to its final price.

 

No, the reason is that that is where the fuel cell lobby is. That is where CARB seemed to think they needed fuel cells most because somehow that is where CO2 is the most dangerous (that was sarcasm if you didn't get it, (co2 in the small quantities cars produce doesn't matter if its in LA or China)). We get one government subsidized private station at Torrance that does come from shell's pipeline.

One thing that hydrogen advocates always leave out when saying electricity is dirty (really, why?) but for the 10,000 psi tanks the fuel cell lobby wants to fill, you need to compress or liquify it. Yep all of that will be done on that oh so dirty california grid. If you truck it you aren't going to use a fuel cell truck, they are very expensive and you will use up your load, its going to take diesel. Hydrogen may be a fine fuel for a range extender, but it really is not as efficient or convenient as plugging in.

Hydrogen Blast: The fuel of the future… and it always will be | Eco Barons
So how far are you willing to drive to fuel your brand new fuel cell car versus say the next gen phev? How much are you willing to pay?