Toyota rep: If you buy the Mirai, you pay for the hydrogen yourself

no one is insecure about its existence

people are upset about an inefficient use of limited alt-fuel funds

that's all really

 

Greencarreports reads PriusChat! Why Do Fuel-Cell Vehicles Make Electric-Car Advocates So Crazy?

So, the anti-fuel cell crowd are looking out for the taxpayers!

Also the anti-electric crowd are looking out for the taxpayers!
Tesla, Nissan Take Financial Hits as States Remove EV Subsidies

If Tesla Would Stop Selling Cars, We'd All Save Some Money - Forbes

 

The anti-electric crowd believes that there's no need for gasoline alternatives.

The pro-EV crowd is very aware that alternatives to gasoline are needed, and is pushing for the most efficient use of limited government funds to achieve that goal.

But yes, please pigeonhole us and dismiss our arguments, I'm sure we'll all be better off by doing that.
merged
The other thing, of course, is that many EV drivers see that FCVs are in competition with EVs and some unwitting consumers will think that the two are equally "green" or "clean" when the reality is quite far from the that.

 

Here's Where Electric Vehicles Actually Cause More ...


Maps show the environmental damages by county for a 2014 gas (left panel) and electric (right) Ford Focus.

 

That is all well and good. And thank you for typing slow so I can understand. I wasn't criticizing your statement, but those in general supporting the Toyota press release hype that the mirai will be just like the Prius. That peoples will see them and buy them.

So I am not saying toyota is wasting its time, but it was brought up in shareholder meetings that they are wasting a lot of money. The answer seemed to be they have $60B to waste.

The main gist of the anti - this will be just like the prius talk, and thanks to another priuschat poster for finding my post from 14 months ago, is it can't grow fast, or be self sustaining, because of the infrastructure.

I'll be happy with an agreement here. FCV are not going to really be selected over many plug-ins in the next decade, because the infrastructure is so slow to build and expensive. If you buy one now the chances of you driving accross the country as conviently as gas in 5 or 6 years just won't happen.

Here I mainly hear the fuel cell lobby saying no one wants plug-ins. It may be that you and I are listening to different audiences. Steven chu in 2009 said not much hope for commercialization in the next decade. That is still true 6 years later. We are just dumbing down commercialization, so lets talk number of vehicles. After that who knows. But it won't be like the prius. I don't think tesla or toyota are wasting their time on R&D for the perspective vehicles. I do think toyota is wasting a bunch of its own and taxpayer money trying to commercialize them now, instead of 2 or 3 years from now, but The tax plans are in place in japan and california and in 3 years we will have a much better understanding of how many fcv will be around in 2025. My guess is less than 120,000 in North America. That's a little less than the number of plug-ins sold last year. No toyota is not wasting their time, and they do have a lot of money. They can do all kinds of other things and fuel cells too.

I have no problem with the miarai. I do have a problem with the toyota misleading claims about fuel cells and plug-ins. Definitely a change of tone, a change in lobbying, and I woudl be fine with the R&D and the car.

What I think a lot of what your hear as defensiveness are people that think toyota and carb will be able to pull money out of plug-ins like they did before. People have memories. Last time they had GM, Honda, and Ford with them. This time GM and Ford are on the plug-in side. BMW and Hyundai seem to be moving toward not pulling money from commercializing plug-ins to pay for more fuel cells too. What do you think? If a leaf and i3-bev get 3 carb credits, a tesla because of range 4, how many should a volt and a mirai get. Should the mirai have to prove it has easy refueling or just say the tax payers will fix it to get the credits?

There is a little schadenfreude for mary nichols having to lower her estimates so much from 2009 when she rallyed congressional support against steven chu. While I want the mirai to do well, I don't like her at all, and think she is bad for the environment.
merged

Nice, It almost looks like a heat map. Where plug-in cars sell best are the green areas. Sure we have georgia, where plug-in sell well being red, but they didn't correct for those plug-in drivers buying renewable there. Georgia is also part of the cap and trade system of power plant harmful emissions, which means more demand from plug-ins will not increase harmful SO2 or NOx at all.

It would be great to see where the mirai will sell on that map. Oh yeah california.

 

I'm not doing that at all.
Just defending my 1 sentence statement that is being invalidly used as a spring board to advance peoples arguments against The Mirai, and fuel cell vehicles.

If you notice, other then saying I like the existence of the Mirai, I have neither pigeonholed or dismissed any ones opinion.

 

Yes, I hate hate hate hate hate hate hate the waste of public money it represents, for something that benefits hardly anyone unlike the much higher potential of BEVs. I would be even more livid if I was an unlucky Californian.
merged

There's no need to continue to post the same links repeatedly (Forbes, lol). (now you've got me repeating myself) Otherwise you should be clamoring just as loudly about the lost public monies on the Prius incentives. Huff Puff (lol) is on my block list. I wonder who bankrolled them to come up with this forced statistic.

 

It will become clear how important this initial rollout funding is.

The interesting thing is, some of the most outspoken pro-EV posters drive gas cars.

Read that Forbes article. Add solar incentives, then we'll have something cleaner than hybrids.

How is that efficient use of limited government funds?

Putting all of those funding eggs into one technology is also the best use?

Right. FCV is clearly cleaner. Assuming both are rolled out all states and sales are spread like gas cars and fuel with stock fuel.

 

except that by the time that happens, either pigs will fly, or EVs will be leaps and bounds cleaner than FCVs. but sure, let's have this discussion again.
merged

no, a better use is to pick technology winners from the get-go by giving FCVs more CARB credits for absolutely no reason.

 

The technologies aren't mutually exclusive. It seems realistic for them to co-exist too, especially when you consider the inevitable fight-back from the existing infrastructure.

 

study is quite questionable for a number of reasons:

1. They converted "damages" to "cents". How? How did they put a price on something like grams of NOx? The map doesn't show emissions, it shows "cost of environmental damage from driving a mile". Okay…
2. Somehow for electric cars they managed to trace the entire fuel delivery path (well to wheels), but for gas cars, the gasoline just magically shows up in the gas tank. What?
3. Finally, this quote from the study's authors should immediately raise flags: "Assuming electricity grids will get cleaner, moving away from gasoline cars is the only way to approach a zero-carbon transportation sector (not to mention avoiding the political costs of oil dependence). Holland counters that rising fuel-efficiency standards are making gas cars a lot cleaner, too." Yeah, but the problem is that even if we get super fuel efficient cars today, all the old cars on the road won't suddenly get more efficient. With EVs, the car continues to get more efficient and cleaner with time with zero effort on the owner's part.
merged

i think the point here is that given that inevitable fight-back, it makes much more sense to concentrate the resources on something that works today and fits people's lifestyles better today. FCVs have a long way to go before we can say that about them; EVs are already there.

 

2016 Toyota Mirai Test Drive @ Toyota Santa Monica

 

Just watched the video. Interesting.

 

when the only exhaust is water…thanks but I'm not a child.

hint…EV has no exhaust at all.

i also like how they didn't actually show how long it took to fill up.

 

You can't be too surprised given who tested it. Impressions from more objective parties will be juicy.

 

California has spent its own and federal money on 'hydrogen highways' in the past without any cars beyond a small test fleet. Some of the hydrogen stations having issues now were survivors of that earlier funding. Part of the millions spent is to update them.

Are you signing up for a FCEV when they become available on the East Coast?
I have already stated why I don't have a plug in despite wanting one, why I no longer have my 2005 Prius, and why I won't consider the currently available Prii now.

The 30% tax credit for residential solar(heat and electric) is in effect until the end of 2016. It also applies to geothermal heat pumps, wind power, and home fuel cells.

Considering that the cost of the batteries has been dropping 7% or more per year since its introduction, the federal tax credit has been effective. The advances in batteries it has lead to can also be applied to hybrids and, get this, FCEVs. Or do you believe Tesla or others are going to charge a buyer more if the batteries are for hybrids or FCEVs.

Is that including the emissions of building an entirely new infrastructure for hydrogen?
The grid is getting cleaner. Comparing 2009 grid mix to some future date when FCEVs are available nation wide isn't a like comparison.

Yes, but the issue in California is that FCEVs are getting preferential treatment over plug ins while the existing cars get to slide by. Perhaps a program to help get the older, dirty cars off the road would do more to clean up California air.

It's car only available in California, and can not be driven out of that state.
I have a choice of 8, maybe 10, plug in models in Eastern Pennsylvania right now.

 

8 times a year you may borrow a new car from your Toyota dealer for the times you need to drive out of state........

 

If there's a problem with the traction battery, GM will cover it under warranty, whether it's sold or not. GM will not cover a 12V battery on any unsold vehicle, not just the Volt. It's the dealer's responsibility to keep the battery charged, and if they don't, they eat the battery.

 

That's how incentives work. When plugins came out, regular hybrid incentive got removed or lowered.

CARB: For FCV to take the show with fast refuel, move over plugins.

I didnt' hear you kicking and screaming when plugins took over hybrid incentives.

 

When did that happen?
I'm just curious of the timeline. I would guess that plugin incentives didn't "take over" before plug ins were available state wide?
Or, that they didn't "take over" at all, but we're set to end at a certain point, regardless of what was there to replace them.
This is how the federal incentives work, I'm not sure about the CARB system.