Featured Toyota's Master Plan for a Low Carbon Future

Growth in Europe is backlash against diesels. Then Toyota's market share there is at 5.3%, so any increases will look big.

Two million worldwide is small to the 74.1 million new cars sold in 2019. Part of the reason Toyota opened up their patent book was in order to increase the production of components. To get the cost as close as possible to a ICE vehicle, you need ICE vehicle production volumes.

IIRC, the Prius c to Yaris difference was around $2000. For a segment that starts well under $20k, that is steep without high fuel prices to justify it. The Corolla hybrid is $3000 more here, and the Yaris will likely have the same drive train. This is academic though. With the North America Yaris being a Mazda, I don't see us getting a Yaris hybrid.

 

How? Prius was pretty big consumer choice hit before Congress finally decided to give some hybrid credits in a system that mostly focused on making sure Toyota could not get all the credits by limiting to 50000 cars per co.?

 

That statement he made was so misleading, it was basically bait and I didn't want to bite. But since you brought it up, yes, anyone believing the tax-credits were the same for hybrids as they are for plug-ins has no idea what they are talking about.

January 1, 2006 is when the first tax-credit for hybrids became available. That was 5.5 years after I purchased mine and well into the second-generation offerings at that point, with Prius annual sales already exceeding 100,000. The total quantity was limited to 60,000 per automaker and the value was less than half as much.

 

Hybrids were getting a tax deduction before the credits were introduced. Plus there were state incentives at the time. The HOV access was popular in California and Virginia.

And let's not forget that when the gen2 Prius was introduced, US gas prices started climbing steeply.

Fact #915: March 7, 2016 Average Historical Annual Gasoline Pump Price, 1929-2015 | Department of Energy

The cost difference between the three and four cylinder will be small.

Companies aren't abandoning the sub-compact segment. They've dropped small cars, and even larger sedans, in America. Those with a global presence still sell small cars in other markets. If don't have one already, they will replace them with a small crossover/SUV. Low fuel prices have lead to cars no longer being popular. They are also the reason why America won't get a hybrid smaller than the Corolla.

 

$$$ is not the only incentive. Years earlier, California got solo HOV Car Pool lane stickers - in a state where MOST hybrids were being purchased. You could save an hour drive time with solo HOV stickers. It's so important, that even today - you make too much money per year? You can only get one or the other .... incentive money or stickers. Many opt for the stickers.
So - it's NOT false or misleading at all to say when incentives started.
.

 

Pointing out how lack is detail can be misleading is very much on topic. In this case, the comment was so vague, it was obviously baitt. Snce the poster already knew the informstion, why not just post it?

 

All opinion. No facts. Pure balderdash.

 

Toyota has a lot tied up in hybrids. They just want to milk the government before the free ride comes to an end

 

So, Toyota is selling into nearly 80% of the current market, with plug ins being nearly equal to BEVs. That's good business. And the Prius Gen 4 is still a better option for me at any price when compared to a Tesla.

 

Nothing wrong with good business, I just don’t agree with the premise

 

A complaint without a suggestion just wastes everyone's time.

What do suggest for a 2030 target with regard to a majority of each automaker's production? What premise?

Notice how everyone, except Toyota, is only focusing on the low-hanging fruit? The absence of anything for the bulk of the business should be a red flag... in other words NOT good business.

 

government should be incentivizing plug ins of all types, with an emphasis on bevs, charging stations and renewable energy

 

That's not a target or even anything quantifiable. In fact, that was just another vague response. You're contributing to the lack of accountability problem.

 

Let me offer some suggestions and hard specifications to eliminate 'compliance' vehicles. Basis of estimate, experience with BMW i3-REx (36k mi, 4 yrs,) Prius Prime (16k mi, 3 yr,) and Std. Rng. Plus Model 3 (19k mi, 11 mo.):

• BEV
  • minimum 250 mile, highway range on a Standard Day, 63 mph
  • minimum 125 kW, peak fast DC charging rate
  • minimum 10 kW, peak L2 charging rate
• PHEV
  • minimum 65 mile, EV highway range on a Standard Day, 63 mph
  • minimum 125 kW, peak fast DC charging rate
  • minimum 10 kW, peak L2 charging rate
  • minimum 40 MPG, highway range on a Standard Day, 63 mph
  • minimum 250 mile, gas highway range on a Standard Day, 63 mph

The 250 mile range at 63 mph is enough for about +3 hours of driving. This approaches normal human limits before a biology break is needed for alertness.

The 125 kW charging rate minimizes time at fast DC chargers so cars get in and get out quickly. Faster is better but at this rate, a half hour is enough to take a snack, charge, and keep on rolling.

The 10 kW, L2 charge rate is enough to cover the distance between errands at shops including those offering L2 service. If stuck away from fast DC chargers, in ~4-5 hours, enough charge to take a nap and then move on. NOTE: needs to be a smart charger that can ramp the current up and measure the voltage drop to avoid tripping circuit breaker.

At 40 MPG gas efficiency, it ensures the car doesn't waste gas on the road. More is better but this is the minimum.

The 65 mile PHEV range is enough for a day of errands or local city-to-city travel.​

Side note, rugged, weather proof, portable EVSE should be dual voltage and rated up to 10 kW. Car should record charging profile and via wireless report to iPhone/Android and laptop apps.

Bob Wilson

 

what's the point? this is priuschat, we're discussing. i'm not a government employee, nor do i have any control over government tax incentives.
the o/p article written by a toyota employee is just a blog trying to sway people's opinions to put more money in their pockets.
i do not agree with them.

 

The point is to rise above the rhetoric, not to contribute to it.

 

From the OP article (suggesting Toyota's manufacturing reasoning is primarily based on emissions & 'low-carbon' goals);

the thing is - it's not all about how many batteries it takes to be clean, in a car. The aurhor suggests that's Toyota's primary objective. This battery quantity 'answer' totally discounts the filth coming from manufacturing fuels - & of massive fuel tanker manufacturing, leaking drill sites & Pipelines & spills, strategic-geo-political / war cost issues, environmental impact of manufacturing ice & collateral fuel & maintenance components, collateral pulmonary / health costs issues .... profits via servicing non-renewable fuel burning engines etc - all part of the concerns in continuing the manufacturing of collateral components of - & engines burning non-renewables.
In short, the author oversimplifies and attempts to give a halo effect on the Toyota objective. Toyota, like all ice auto manufacturers' primary objective is squeezing money out of their existing manufacturing infrastructure.
.

 

Tell that to Toyota.

 

Until his purchasing power speaks otherwise, Toyota will do the same as they always have.

One member who has owned just as long as he has used his purchasing power to speak: Model 3 it is.

But I've owned a Prius for 11 years and I'm still satisfied with their approach.