Featured Toyota going to sell all-solid-state battery EV in 2022

well we CAN throw numbers out there, but is it really necessary? Tesla basically made a laughingstock out of the whole "gasoline can get you back on the road way faster" notion. In essence they showed the world that you can work a big car battery just like a Makita drill motor battery ... snap it in & out pretty fast. But as i've joked many times - if you think charging is slow - try buying gas at costco


Anyway - there were 2 things that overrode the whole battery swap-out station implementation.
#1 (really the best reason) Tesla owners were perfectly content with charging their cars for ½hr, ± 10 minutes.
Geeeze - you drive 70mph for 3 or 4 hrs - & you don't need to eat or stretch or answre a nature call or all 3? Really?

1st - EV drivers are a minority. 2nd, regular marathon drivers are a smaller minority of drivers w/in the minority. 3rd - Marathon drivers who can't afford a few minutes during a refuel are a minority within another minority. So it would really be kind of stupid to cater to such a teeny group that are wringing their hands over nothing.
#2 the hydrogen Lobby was up to their usual Shenanigans, trying to Cripple Tesla credits - by claiming/lobbying against electric cars couldn't get back on the road - as a hydrogen car could, by dumping 10,000 PSI into a tank. Of course, once Tesla proved the lobby was blowing smoke, they gave up on that tactic. In fact, the last thing the fuel-cell lobby wanted, was for electric cars to look even more appealing than hydrogen. But accidentally, that's what they did.
.

 

I think costs are important, as was the technology demonstration. The demo was really aimed at hydrogen not liquid fuels. There really are likely to be some buyers in the future that do want fast charges. I can see this being economically feasible between LA and San Francisco and between LA and Las Vegas soon.
Permits Reveal Tesla Is Working On 40-Stall Supercharger Between Las Vegas And Los Angeles

A system where you could swap on the way there, then swap back on the way back, with your pack fully charged seems doable and convenient on this type of trip.

I agree completely here, but I think with the model 3 you will get a new group of buyers that simply want a great driving car, and are willing to pay more than a camry, accord, or fusion. This group may like the convenience of charging at home most of the time, but want the quick change over on long trips. The thing that makes the battery swap thing not so good, is to keep it cheap, you will need to swap similarly valued batteries or swap back. I see the biggest thing as people buying a 60 kwh vehicle, then swapping to 100 kwh pack for a long trip, then getting their pack back on the way back.

Yep, this was the biggest thing about the demo.

 

If I was on a long trip I would be OK with a 15 min recharge rather than a 5 min.
I'd rather a recharge station have 30 stations that can do a 15 min recharge than 10 that do a 5 min recharge.

First most people are not going to stand there the whole time and wait. So people and cars will be taking up space and not keeping the chargers fully busy.

Cleaning windows and taking a bio break will easily consume most of 15 min.

And design the stations so that at least two cars can park at each charging station and the cable can reach both cars. That saves a few minutes of car shuffling when the stations are busy.

Mike

 

Is Toyota going to pay for the required charging stations, or are they going to foist it onto the rest of us?

 

i have to agree with the poster who said the charging stations will come with market demand. private enterprise will step in, if there is a profit to be made.

 

This is the chicken-and-egg scenario,
Since there is no EV charging infrastructure and there is a lower cost alternative to EVs, there will not be sufficient demand for private enterprise to build out an EV charging infrastructure.
EV demand will be reduced due to the lack of infrastructure too.

Tesla solved the problem by building their super charging network and restricting use to only their vehicles.

 

And Tesla saw fit to build their adapter so that if there are thin areas where few Tesla's travel, the ChadaMo locations /adapter will help pick up the slack. It was in Sacramento of all places that our adapter saved our Goose from being cooked - because the state capital is not exactly near the closest 5 freeway supercharger location ... rather 30 miles to the east! That would have been a 60 mile detour.
.

 

that's a business decision for tesla, they aren't a non profit, and they don't have an alternative profit machine.
most other manufacturers are building ev's due to regulations, not profit motive. if government (that's us) wants evse stations, then they will provide similar incentives.
as it is, we already have them in our homes, an advantage gasoline cars did not have when they were first introduced.
now, i'm not against manufacturers installing stations, it's just not a requirement for me to buy their product. but i don't hold it against them either.
i won't buy a tesla because the have a charging network, but i might buy one if i like the product more than other offerings.

 

If the manufacturer is going to promote the faster charge time of their of their EV, but not take steps to at least help make the required chargers to do so available, I'll hold it against them. Just like I do in regards to FCEVs and hydrogen stations.

 

Lets be fair here. My typical gas station has a dozen pumps but some are consumed by a truck and a trailer/boat/etc. And there is some shuffling to be done as my car and the hulking SUV in front of me take radically different times to fill up.

Since the average gas station on the interstates makes its money inside the store and not at the pumps, there should be an incentive to install chargers. People stuck for a long time charging will go inside and buy.

 

everyone is free to choose what they hold against companies and what they don't. another benefit of the free market system, as we currently know it.
as for toyota's marketing press release, standard fare in the auto industry. who knows what 2022 will bring?

 

We've always supported/noticed cool stuff right around the banks of superchargers. It might be different restaurants, pet stores, takeout, gift shops, hotels, costcos, or whatever. Our new favorite mexican restaurant we found while supercharging in San Juan Capistrano just 8 miles to the south of home .... a 2 minute walk back to the car. It's SO GOOD! Definitely never felt stuck there.
.

 

more opportunity to spend money.

 

For many of the naysayers of fast charging (out & about or at home) it's always going to be a "problem". For real true convenience, it's too bad we can't all have refineries in our neighborhood or heck, maybe even in our backyard or on our roof.



After all, when the complaints over chargespeed, electric cars, or range happen, the filth and nonrenewable issue never seems to be a decent offset. Maybe that's part of the whole NIMBY thing. Out of sight, out of mind. At least until the next Valdez, medical issue, gas hike, or Gulf deep well blowout. Got to love trade-offs.
.

 

maybe have regional facilities, and gasoline lines running to the houses.

 

There are people who do home fueling of their Civic GXes...

 

They no longer should be doing so on Honda's recommendation. The home filling units were allowing too much moisture into the car, and it lead to rusting in the fuel system.

I recall some hydrogen supporters saying we'll have hydrogen lines running to our homes, with a fuel cell in all our appliances. Or maybe just a fuel cell for the house.

 

my 96 year old father is still waiting for the home fuel cell, or nuke. he thinks big oil squashed it.

 

Model T could run fine on ethanol. Many people had stills in their back yard and used the crops to fuel their cars. Then gasoline got cheap because of oil finds to replace whale oil in lamps with kerosene. Why make it at home if you can buy it cheaper at the store.

Fast forward to 2017, and I think we should still have flex fuel vehicles so that we can change the ratio of liquid fuels based on costs. Our homes, at least most of them are wired with fast delivery of electricity, or back up users for made on roof solar. I really think if you are remote you are better off at least having an option to pour liquid fuels in the car, but on the grid solar roofs and plug-in cars make perfect sense. Hell remote PHEVs make sense, and they should make them with good power take off to act as generators for remote locations when the sun isn't shining.

Nimbyism seems most used on the coast. Here in texas we seem to embrace fracking, refining, wind, and solar. Why wouldn't we want to charge our cars with wind at night, natural gas for quick charging on long trips, and sell the refined products to other states and nations ;-) Seems like a good thing to do.

Sure, but the compressors have problems removing water and are expensive. The natural gas comes from far away, but like electricity is sent to the homes inexpensively. IMHO using natural gas and excess generated electricity and CO2 to make methanol, and using it in flex fuel cars (maybe even PHEVs) seems like a much better idea for natural gas to fuel transportation .

I think honda killed the civic gx last year. The clarity phev, that comes later this year appears to be better in every way than this civic gx and is not that much more than the civic gx after incentives. Clarity phev is faster, roomier, bigger trunk, more easily fueled at home and on the road, and produces less ghg. It does use more oil though, and may not compete all that well with the prius prime or tesla model 3 when they get more production going.