A petition to Toyota to build electric vehicles

Utility grade grid batteries are quickly coming online to optimize the integration of renewable generation sources:

Texas Utility Plans $2 Billion Battery Fix for Wavering Wind and Solar Power - Bloomberg

US utility Southern California Edison’s 235MW of battery energy storage awards in focus | PV-Tech Storage

Japan has been rolling out lots of solar PV generation but a surprising number of states in the U.S. are getting serious about renewables. California law requires 33% renewable electric generation by the state's large public utilities by 2020 (not counting an additional 10-15% from large hydro dams).

California's Commitment to Renewable Energy | Union of Concerned Scientists

Renewable portfolio standard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Big battery PHEVs and BEVs can be the ultimate flex-fuel vehicles on a grid like that and use low-carbon energy for a large majority of their driven miles. Highly efficient non-plug hybrids can fill the remaining gap and conventional gas cars can be relegated to the dustbin of history.

 

and dirigibles.

 

There are a lot more hurdles to be crossed with hydrogen that aren't really being factored in here. There's no cost-effective way to manufacture it, and there's no practical way to store it in a vehicle. A pressure vessel would have to be massive and heavy, or if non-pressurized hydrogen "slush" were used, it would have to be consumed within hours of being loaded in the vehicle.

 

I don't see these as huge barriers, in and of themselves.

Hydrogen is $10-12 a kg and fuel cell cars will typically get 45-65 miles per kg. That's like getting 18-25 mpg while driving on $4 per gallon of gasoline. Lots of people have done that during the last decade in California.

The new fuel cell cars now store about 5 kg of hydrogen in their 10,000 PSI tanks which is enough to drive around 250-300 miles. That's adequate but not great given that all fueling is at a commercial station (no fueling at home).

The real problem I see is that hydrogen fuel cell cars (which are hybrids) aren't clearly better than gasoline hybrids which are their real chemically-fueled competitors. Hydrogen FCVs are more expensive to fuel, have less fuel storage, and require a completely new fueling infrastructure, design, and repair technician training. And, they do not emit less carbon dioxide.

What's the point? They aren't better.

A better answer is a mix of BEVs, PHEVs, and full hybrid gasoline cars. Over time as batteries improve the number of non-plug cars will shrink. Carbon reduction efforts can be focused on the grid and used by cars as well as other traditional grid users.

Totally new technology should be adopted when it is clearly a winner. Hydrogen fuel cells for everyday passenger cars (or as range extenders in ordinary plugin hybrids) just don't have a compelling case that makes it worth the effort to adopt them.

The whole fuel cell thing has the potential to be a major distraction from where the focus should be -- on adopting grid-electrified vehicles that can efficiently substitute increasing amounts of non-fossil-spiced electricity for fossil fuel.

 

Drawing a conclusion about new technology shouldn't be made until it is ready for that stage either.

Hydrogen fuel-cells are still only at the "try it in real-world conditions" stage. There is no effort whatsoever being made to reach anything representing the everyday market yet, not even remotely close. 200 of them will be offered for purchase here the first year. That's not even enough to qualify as a compliance quantity. It's not but a "collect data from random people" step. That's what you do to progress forward with development.

Long story short, the "compelling case" consideration is many years away still.

 

Until we can drill a well and extract hydrogen from it, petroleum will continue to have an advantage over it.

 

+1

I agree with most of this, but it clearly allong with the hype and lobbying is enough for compliance.
The sales goal, likely undrstated is for 3000 vehicles by 2017, which given toyota's lobbying is equivalent to 9,000 BEVs because of the extra credits toyota got California to approve last year.

I doubt that this plan is to collect data from people toyota's PR effort is full speed ahead on fcv being better than plug-ins. If it was not what is the use of the 12 stations in the northeast, other than to get 5 states congressional delegations to help hype hydrogen at the expense of plug-ins. I see at most hundreds of fcv being leased in those 5 states, so its not about a test.

 

The "let's get data from random people" started with the Honda Clarity and M-B F-Cell a few years ago. Toyota had the FCHV-adv out to several fleets at that time also.

 

Right. After the initial 200 vehicle rollout next year, Toyota has said they want to deliver 1-2k Mirai cars In the subsequent couple of years after that. Those are clearly compliance car quantities.

 

Not setting a goal of any sort is what?

 

Toyota set a goal.
Green Car Congress: Toyota’s Carter: we’re on the cusp of the automotive hydrogen age

Then we heard the numbers in November. 700 in 2015, 200 in the US. Another 2800 in the US in 2016 and 2017 combined. These are compliance numbers. They are not research numbers to figure out if there is a market, nor is it the cusp of a hydrogen age.

At least with the numbers we can simply reject the hype in each toyota PR anouncement about mirai being the future, as they clearly are blowing smoke and playing politics. I would not count them out, with about $50K per car subsidy in fueling and directly in Japan, they may eventually bring costs down.

 

Setting a quantity could just as easy mean they are making it clear the vehicle will be considered a niche for now.

 

For the Mirai to be a success they've got to convince their existing hybrid customer base that it's the car to replace their Prius with. There is a lot of Prius loyalty. I fear it will be pushed to the limit.

Oh and I've just found out the UK price of hydrogen; £12 a kg ($18.70). That is bordering on more expensive than petrol. Why buy a Mirai if it costs 3x more to buy and 2x more to run. At least with a BEV it costs 1.5x more to buy and zip to run.

But why are we wasting our time trying to petition Toyota? They've invested their money in hydrogen and plug ins. We're not going to change their minds. Nissan, Renault, BMW, VW and Kia are have all decided on BEVs and those are all world class companies. Honda, GM and Toyota are going towards hydrogen.

 

at least until the tax dollars run out, then maybe they'll get serious.

 

I keep wondering what the petition is actually for. We know they are still working to improve batteries. We know that motor & controller improvements for the fuel-cell will be a direct benefit to future battery-powered vehicles. We also know that Toyota doesn't bet the farm on any single technology.

Who else has had success in the EV market so far? Sustainable quantities have only been achieved by Nissan & Tesla. Both of which depend upon tax-credits and have uncertain targets though. The long-term potential is fantastic. But looking at the other automakers (Ford, GM, VW, Honda, Mitsubishi, Smart, Kia, Fiat) all struggling right now, it seems odds to push for rollout from Toyota.

Changing the way the EV is promoted makes far more sense. I can see that as a worthwhile effort. We already know any low-volume attempt will just be spun as a compliance move anyway. What will adding another choice accomplish?

I see the real gain coming from greater market penetration of hybrids. Finally letting go of traditional vehicles is an extraordinarily difficult bridge to cross. So many pressures pushing back make it a daunting challenge to try to achieve a paradigm shift quickly... hence striving to diversify instead. We'll see the fuel-cell & hydrogen progress slowly in the meantime. We'll also see uncertainty faced by the other automakers. What will their next move be?

The next-gen plug for Prius will tell us much about what true change is coming. It will be the major influence as to what degree other plug-in offerings from Toyota will be, not a vague petition without any clear message on what's actually wanted.

 

Hybrids have been stuck for some time around 3% market penetration.
How do you expect Toyota to expand that?

The plugin vehicles are the way to expand that market. I don't know why Toyota is downplaying that market.

The early adopters have moved on to Electrics, so the FCEVs won't find many of that group. Sure, a few, but not many.

To get more than 3-4% of the market, the car must appeal to more than just those that want to use less gas.
Or, a shift must take place in American culture that values less gasoline usage higher than comfort, performance, and convenience.
We haven't had much luck making that shift, and I do think it would be a good shift, I just don't see it happening.

 

Same answer as when you asked that question recently.

 

agreed. it would be good, but i don't see it happening either. it's going to be a long time before someone comes out with an alternate fuel vehicle that will start replacing the likes of camry, corolla, civic, accord, malibu and etc. at their price points. and today's gas prices.

 

Cheap gas! $1.99/Gallon Gasoline Arrives In Oklahoma City - The Truth About Cars

 

i heard it's under $2.00 in 6 states. it won't be low forever, but our government is probably better at keeping gas prices artificially low than anything else they do.