Featured California to boycott Toyota products

can't register older trucks? makes one wonder why he didn't just sell the older tractor, buy a glider tractor, so he'd have a new vin, put the new motor in the glider & move on ..... he might still owe $20K ... but .... skip a few Big Macs & Fries over a 5yr loan (low interest now days) , & the financing should be a breeze. Likely that came out on cross-exam, but that wouldn't overemphasize the witness' point I suppose. Life is hard. It's great to ease the misery of life's hardness, but there's a giant downside from making things too easy on too many. This, from someone who had to sleep in a car, & in a dilapidated trailer on occasion. Great motivator to work one's way through graduate school & onto a better life.
.

 

an individual negatively affected by government regulations? unprecedented!!!

(we used to call it democracy)

 

There is no dispute from me that for the last decade or so that California has pursued GHG reduction as the top priority.

I only suggest that is unilateral and defacto setting the national policy because automakers have to comply with Ca. mandates.
Congress gave Ca. control over pollutants to help Ca. solve special geographic related smog issues, not to to allow Ca. to take control over national climate change policy and not to mandate Ca.'s political correct preferences on the US auto market..

"...Ozone is another problem due to vehicles emissions. Breathing ozone can trigger a variety of health problems including chest pain, coughing, throat irritation, and congestion. Ozone forms when nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs), react in the atmosphere in the presence of sunlight."

OK on Ozone...but what I am trying to say NOx, CO, VOC are essentially zero from (USA) cars today. The 3-way catalytic converter destroys exactly those three pollutants, quite handily. CARB cars like Prius get low MPG first 5 minutes to minimize warm-up emissions. If you have proof the warm-up period is serious smog issue for Ca....let me know. Certainly the Ca. past several governors rhetoric has been that GHG control is their over-riding policy strategy.

So now lets go diesel/trucks and yes we still got NOx etc etc.

 

Even with the collection system, gasoline stations still smell like... gasoline.
Maybe it's all those people squeezing... that.. last.... bit... more... in... until it dribbles, ok I'm full.

 

Warm up emissions are still an issue. The gen1 Volt initially didn't qualify for California incentives because of a spike of CO during start up.
And essentially zero once everything is warmed up and running right still adds up when there are millions of sources. They were essentially zero before the switch to ultra low sulfur gasoline, yet that was needed to allow even better cats to work, and existing cats to keep reducing emissions for longer.

 

So, when Biden becomes President, presumably the Trump initiated lawsuit against California over its right to set its own fuel economy standards (given to them by Congress) will go away, which means Toyota's support of this lawsuit will also go away (since the lawsuit will no longer exist).

Then California's ban on buying Toyota vehicles for California fleet purchases will also go away.

 

California.....

 

You sure? I thought California already prevailed in that challenge?

 

The ban was going to go away so CARB could support the new Mirai.

 

Sorry for being dense today, could you provide more details or cite source(s)?

• "The ban was going to go away ..." - the ICE ban the California Governor had announced?
• "... so CARB could support the new Mirai." - Mary D. Nichols likes the Mirai?

The Fremont/Alameda County and Hawthorne/Los Angeles County have done everything they can to drive Elon away during CORNA. As for as Tesla is concerned, it appears to be working ... Hello Texas and Germany. Then San Francisco/San Francisco County have decided on a special tax on executives ... Hello Texas.

A few specifics about "the ban" would help as well as the "CARB ... support the ... Mirai." Toyota already moved their HQ to Texas and selling more Mirai in California is not going to bring the Toyota HQ back. California already has ~40 hydrogen fuel stations at ~$2m each ... ~$80m. Ok, double it to 80 hydrogen fuel stations and spend another $80m. Mirai sales are not going to bring Toyota HQ back to California but it will help Elon and the clever engineers to seek better opportunity.

Bob Wilson

 

The ban against state agencies buying Toyota products because Toyota sided with the Trump administration over fuel economy standards.

Don't know how many Mirai California has bought in the past, but vocal hydrogen supporters are or were in the California government.

 

presuming how many Mirai California bought actually means lease? From long ago reads, iirc - all of the governmental/municipality acquisitions were not actual purchases. On a side note, carving out an exception for hydrogen cars as "zero emission" cars - even though they run on ~ ⅔ non-enewable reformed hydrogen ... took a bit of convincing of California legislators, even though they can easily be "convinced" (bought off).
It would be great if the EV association would point out to our legislative crew up in Sacramento, that China has taken a more practical approach, requiring significant technological breakthroughs in order to remain on the free money teet.
Is there any possibility Toyota corporate fled to Texas because of this boycott?
.

 

Here's an article about the ban. Since it is just a policy, they could enforce or cancel it at any time. I haven't heard about Trump's lawsuit ending or the ban going away, though. If you have other information, can you share it?

I've never understood California's continued support for hydrogen cars. There are quite a few programs so it ends up costing taxpayers many, many millions of dollars--all to support about 6000 hydrogen cars and a couple of trucks at the LA port. That money could be used better ways, such as to buy electric school buses and stop our kids from breathing in fumes every day.

It is true that the head of CARB, Mary Nichols, has a Mirai and loves it, which maybe has some influence on state policy, unfortunately. Her term ends this year, so maybe that influence will end and they can start redirecting some of these hydrogen subsidies to programs that will have a bigger impact.

As for Fremont/Alameda County pushing Elon away, it was caused by an acting health official in Alameda County telling Tesla they couldn't open their factory yet during the initial Coronavirus lockdown. Fremont was all in favor of them opening and Alameda county really was too--it was just this one official, and she was going to re-assess this decision. I think Elon was furious that one 'acting' health official can make a decision on her own to shut down a billion dollar factory that employs 10s of thousands. In the end he didn't wait and opened his factory anyway (other car factories in the US were opening at the same time). Alameda ended up approving the opening after the fact. Why go to war with one of the biggest employers in the county?

California, though, hasn't been very friendly to manufacturers in general the last few decades, so I can understand Elon's interest in building in Texas. He'll probably keep his high-tech (software/chip design) group in California, though, because there's just so much talent in the state that it would be hard to move the group out.

 

Hydrogen is here to stay and growing, It is an alternative to plug ins for the millions who don’t have access to chargers. You are not aware of how the trucking industry is planning on using Hydrogen and most of Europe is pushing for the use of hydrogen in all types of vehicles?

 

there's over 100X more people within the distance of an ev plug that's usable across the nation than there are hydrogen car Sellers & /or their fueling stations. Obvious reason? Demand, or lack thereof. Yes hydrogen is growing .... & averaging those Vehicles' growth over the past 20 years alone (though hydrogen goes back decades further) would amount to an almost indiscernibly small percentage. BEV on the other hand, in the last year alone have experienced sales - some 200%
Ie growth is relative.
.

 

Hydrogen has just now caught the attention of world leaders and oil companies and are all investing into it as an alternative to BEV. The trucking industry has come around to see that hydrogen has more potential for the industry then EV. Some of the outliners still pushing EV as they have invested into with their car lines like Volvo. California is pushing hard to expand hydrogen stations. All changes in the automotive industry starts within California. This is partly why Toyota only offers the Mirai in California.

 

How many friends and family do you know that purchased a Tesla this month? I can think of 5 new owners of the Mirai this month and several who a waiting for the release of the 2021 model. All from word of mouth.

 

Here in Virginia we are buying a few BEV school buses (from a California company I think), I think Dominion utility is buying them for the schools. I am wondering how much electric a big vehicle like that uses? and how it will do in the 0-degrees winter mornings. But something that size is where the H2 FCEV comes in as better, I thought.
.
Also some towns are using the VW settlement to buy BEV buses.

I have been trying to say, diesel/trucks is probably where any pollution problem is. Cars like Prius are essentially zero pollution, unless someone can explain to me how something like Prius has to be banned from the roads. But yes trucks needs to go to anything but diesel, ASSUMING there is a pollution problem. So that's where H2 FCEV comes in to address the diesel emission problem. Note that with ultra low sulfur diesel, big clean-up strides have been made, but if that is not enough then we have to move away from diesel.

 

Germany is the hydrogen center for Europe, and their domestic car companies are looking to hydrogen for trucking, not cars.

Many places are investing into green hydrogen, but that is because there are bigger uses for it than fuel for cars. Ammonia is one for fertilzer, and it can be burned in engines or fuel cells. We can add 5% to our current gasoline supply. Another is methanol, which can also be used by ICEs and fuel cells. Infrastructure getting it to cars will be a lot cheaper than the infrastructure for hydrogen; there is even a basic one for getting ammonia to farms already in place.

Who is paying for those hydrogen stations in California?
Who will pay for them in other states?

The only reason hydrogen cars didn't die during the Obama administration is because of cheap fracked natural gas, and that isn't going to last for long.

If the range can meet requirements, BEVs are fine local use like buses. Winter cold needs to be considered, but if ICE school buses are still like what I rode, heating was minimal to begin with.

The pollution problem is with old vehicles. Our gasoline formulation and use of AKI for octane rating is for the carbureted cars still running. Diesel trucks just have a long operating life, which makes fleet turn over to cleaner ones slow. We also had a massive loophole that the past administration kept open with gliders. These are whole new trucks minus the engine. So companies and individuals can get a new truck with their old, polluting diesel running it.

For longer distance trucking, hydrogen FCEVs might work out. Less total stations are needed, and fleet operators can install their private stations. This won't help out hydrogen cars though. The 500 mile range of the Tesla Semi makes in a medium range truck. Long range diesel ones could have ranges that hit a thousand miles. Plus, there is the energy requirement for sleeper cabs. Filling these with high pressure gas hydrogen that cars use will take well over an hour. Slow, overnight filling could be a solution, but it would require a pump for every parking spot. Liquid hydrogen is more likely to be used.

Stations installing liquid hydrogen for trucking aren't likely to pay for the ability to refuel a few cars they might see, and people aren't going to buy a hydrogen car if they have to go to the nearest interstate to fill up. Well, they might if its a plug in one with enough EV range for their daily use.

 

@Trollbait

In regards to using Liquid Hydrogen. Does the thought of that give you the willies like it does me? I've not got a problem with a fuel cell, but I'm not a big fan of trucks rolling around liquid hydrogen. I mean the stuff packs a whole bunch more energy in it than gasoline and when it burns it's invisible (or nearly so).

iono - just not a big fan of that until I learn more I guess. I'd like to see some SERIOUS safety measures in regards to liquid hydrogen use.