Luxury brands place fuel cell bets

My house produces half the energy I use as renewable energy. According to studies, using the regular grid in MN in 2009 my car emitted about 10% more ghg.
Once you take into account that I am lowering my neighbors ghg emission by more than that amount, it seems a win.
If you take into account the 2015 grid alone, it is likely a match.
If you also take into account the added renewables I'm still sending into the grid it is a win.

But Toyota isn't concerned with this aspect, and neither are you, so I don't know why you continue to bring it up.

 

Which is part of the problem.
Neither the Prius, not Mirai is targeting the gas guzzlers where the greatest savings can be made.
EVs, on the other hand, are.

 

Big smiles.
2013 Lexus LS600hL Test – Review – Car and Driver

Isn't this the model S hunter killer, that toyota is hinting will be adding a hydrogen option next. you know the car USB posted in the first message.

If toyota was concerned about ghg would they be selling the Lexus LS versus much lower ghg tesla model S. Sure they would, since they want to make money more than they care about ghg.

I don't know how toyota can claim the grid tied wind it uses lowers it's carbon footprint, if zythryn's solar doesn't lower his. Perhaps USB you need to ask toyota these questions. The rest of us know that its

 

This is exhausting. Maybe we should exit this subforum and not give Toyota the credit of the attention it doesn't deserve and let this place devolve into an echo chamber.

 

I wouldn't be commenting here, but I was included your response bellow. We are on a thread about Luxury FCV, which will undoubtedly cost more than the prius, and probably as much or more than a tesla S. They do give you some things that the prius does not. This might be a better argument on ghg reduction hybrid versus zev. I would remind you that some people want zevs, but the biggest push for them is governments, and toyota seems to like this when it applies to fcv, even though say a renewable methanol blend flex fuel hybrid would likely have a lower ghg foot print than a fcv, and only cost about $100/vehicle than today's gasoline hybrids.

I don't think he requested the low price point or spun it. Perhaps you are reading something into the response that is not there.

Which toyota price? The price for a fcv lexus ls? The prius c/aqua. I don't think we were talking about that. My problem is you are scoring fcv differently than plug-ins even if they use the same solar or wind. Here is probably a discussion with toyota's response and non response.

They asked again
Hydrogen Fuel-Cell Car Questions: Toyota, Honda & Hyundai Respond (Part 3)

Note this is the new toyota response with better numbers than that 2009 graph, they think fcv and plug-in about equal in using natural gas. There is no denying that using the same electricity the fcv will be higher, unless you claim 0 of wind or solar in which case you get 0 for both, but if there is any back up then you get higher for fcv.

Well the LS was a hint. With a plan of 30,000 fcv a year starting around the 2020s, I doubt they will have many. Compare either one that they build, I don't really care. All I know is if Tesla made a mirai type car (maybe the model 3, but with much higher performance and a better interior) it would cost tesla less to build. We should know that around 2020 if toyota builds a luxury fcv, and tesla is able to produce the model 3. Until then the only reason to compare the mirai to the model S, is for toyota to get PR. Unfortunately for toyota, I don't think most of that PR is good.

 

Yes, that is true if you have tunnel vision.
Because I am driving electric, my cars have gotten cleaner each year, where the Prius would have gotten dirtier.
Because I am driving electric, many people I know are also driving electric. Some a Tesla, others a Leaf or Volt. Many of these people were not driving a Prius, thus they have lowered their GHG emissions.
Two of the Tesla buyers are politicians who have helped disperse misinformation.
One is a book author.
Another shows cars in the realm of muscle car fans. He has helped bring in a new market for electric cars.

In the years we drove the Prius, we also influenced others to buy a Prius.
Not nearly as many, and not as influential.

We have also stopped contributing to oil's contribution to our trade deficit.
We support our troops (by not contributing to the need to "calm" oil producing areas of the world with our military).
We have stopped contributing to respiratory damage to those living in nearby urban areas.

So yes, for the moment, if you ignore our use of wind power (which we pay extra for) the Prius, in 2010, was a bit lower on GHGs. Currently, I expect they are much closer, if not equal. And over the next few years, even the inefficient (for a gas car) S85 we have will be cleaner than a Prius.

And by that time, FCVs will still not be available for private owners in MN.

 

None of the FCVs met my needs in 2010 when I started driving electric, and non meet them now, and I don't expect any will meet them in ten years.

I personally, have no control over the how the hydrogen is produced, which most likely will be natural gas.
I highly doubt I would ever be able to refuel at home.
The cost to refuel is higher than gas, and even if it expanded would be twice what I pay for electricity.

I'm a huge fan of hydrogen, when it is used for things it makes sense for.
The lies (not pointing at you, but Toyota) and ignoring the challenges is what really ticks me off.

Use it for renewable energy stationary backup.
Test it in fleet vehicles rather than passenger vehicles. It would have a better chance of success.
But insisting we waste money and make the test far more expensive (for the governments, not the companies) is foolish and sets back more apt uses for hydrogen.

 

Will you ever post some proof of Toyota selling the car at cost?

The majority of Mirai drivers are going to lease the car. Tesla didn't even have a lease option for the Model S upon its release. How do those facts jive with your statement? Or the fact that even with the issues, a large majority of Tesla owners would buy the car again

Yes, you have posted it multiple times despite it being pointed out that the data is out of date.

If you are so fascinated by being off grid, you can homestead in Alaska. For those with access to a grid, staying on the grid will do more to advancing carbon reduction of the energy production.

Here is the TL;DR summary. When your off grid energy storage system is full, any excess energy produced by, the likely solar, system will go to absolutely nothing. Tied to the grid, it would go offset the fossil fuel use of your neighbors.

Fine. What about the ICE Camry? Why does Toyota continue to offer it when it pollutes more than the hybrid version? If the Prius plug in was excluded from states because it would be 'dirtier' than the Prius, shouldn't the ICE Camry be excluded for the same reason?

I think Toyota did build one that might have worked for him. They weren't real keen on selling it though; offering it in one state, then ending out of state sales, not folding the federal tax credit into the lease in the beginning like the competition, and then ending the partnership that built it.

[quote[Mirai is available for those want EV experience without long charging time compromise. It is not viable yet due to immaturity of H2 infrastructure but the nature of the tech will fruit soon.[/quote]Unless the powers that be decide to go with 12k psi hydrogen, or water pre-filling, or hydride for fuel storage on cars. Then another another pile of cash is needed to update the stations being built now, like the previous built stations are currently being upgraded.

And why couldn't BEVs charge up as quickly as a FCEV if their infrastructure received to same attention?

The plain old LS hybrid costs more than the Model S. I don't see how a FCEV GS could be competitive against the S.

Never say never. You might see a FCEV running of diesel, gasoline, or an alcohol in that time.

 

Let's see:

2013-2016 Lexus LS600h
23/20/19 (city/combined/highway)

2013 Cadillac Escalade Two-Mode hybrid
23/21/20 (city/combined/highway)

That's embarrassing. The 2016 Cadillac CT6 plugin hybrid is rumored to be 35+ combined mpg in hybrid mode.

Yes, the 600h is more HP and faster 0-60 but worse fuel economy. Toyota vs GM role reversal....

 

Just off the top of my head...
I would partner with a delivery company in CA.
In partnership with the government (state or federal) and the delivery company, build one hydrogen station at their central hub.
After seeing how that works out, expand it to 4 more stations, branching out to other nearby hubs of the delivery company.
After some additional testing, spread further out into California with enough stations to support all areas.

By that time, if everything was working smoothly, allow the public to use those stations and continue to build more stations. Simultaneously release the public cars.

This gives the advantage of there already being in place a rudimentary charging network when public cars are available.
It also gives Toyota the ability to ramp up production numbers up more quickly.
Gives California a chance to see how the vehicles and pumps behave, and how the drivers react to them.

That is just off the top of my head and to me, it seems a better, quicker way to ramp up FCV production.
I am sure if I worked on it for a week with a few other people in the forum we could do even better.

Unless, of course, the goal in the U.S. Is simply to grab ZEV credits. Then what they are doing is fine.

 

Why would you jump to the conclusion H2 stations would be built out of reach of the public in my scenario??
Is that what happened with the tests you mention?

If they have been testing for a dozen years, why are their not thousands of cars/vehicles out their? Did they not ramp up?

Many delivery companies have hubs in metro areas. Building a hydrogen station at the edge of the companies property, or just outside if possible, should work well. As a bonus, the stations would be well situated for a basic network, unlike the barely existing one now.

If quantity will help bring costs down, it only makes sense that the more robust the infrastructure the faster they can ramp up production.
If, as you insist, Toyota is selling the Mirai "at cost" now, there should be no reason not to scale up as quickly as the infrastructure will support.

 

What's funny (speaking of the OP's 'Luxury' model theme) is how as soon as Tesla got a foot hold - the 'Luxury' sellers realized it could quickly erode their easy profits ... higher end / performance cars. And like GM caught with their pants down as the Prius took off, they're now trying to play catch up. Oh - except for Toyota ... they're still stuck (like old GM) trying to convince their self that they couldn't have made a bad decision. Give it a bit more time (less than 10 years) and it's likely Toyota will come around.

.

 

Ok, I'll try once more.

Testing phase 1: Private business, government and manufacturer(s) build H2 stations for use in testing.

Testing phase 2: Private business, government and manufacturer(s) expand the number of H2 stations to additional metro areas.

Testing phase 3: Public testers, government and manufacturer(s) shift former H2 stations to public use updating and adding more statewide. Initial public buyers have a rudimentary state wide infrastructure.

I don't see why you are so opposed to having more robust infrastructure at the initial public rollout.
I get the feeling that if I recommended Toyota build what you would describe as the perfect car, you would oppose it simply because it didn't come from Toyota.

 

glad this was brought up - the largest 'non- private' companies in the world - OIL companies - the very companies standing to make boatloads of money selling non-renewable CO2 natural gas to create hydrogen . . . . they REFUSED to waste their capitol on building a bogus hydrogen highway. Why . . . simple - they crunched the numbers - the obscene petro profits were swallowed up by the even greater expenses of build out & maintenance of a hydrogen highway . It was cheaper to litigate - to sue the government that was trying to force them to build stations that would sell their own product. That's when you know for certain a project is a waste ... when only the government pays. Ie spending other's money because some lobby won't pay for your reelection otherwise.
.

 

Started in 2004 really with a great deal of money. The goal 100 stations by 2010 funded by state of california and DOE money, but ... CARB and CFCP failed miserably. You can read about why in many articles. Stations closed.

I think we are here now. 400 million euros in Germany through 2023 ($53M/year), $20M/year x 11 years California + additional DOE money, 4 billion yen a year($32M/year) in japan. Phase 1 failed, so they have increased the government money. Unfortunately they have not really addressed the reason that phase 1 failed.

+1

The lawsuit had a lot to do with the CARB blame game. If the oil companies aquiesed to CARBs demands and built the stations at an economic loss to compete with themselves, and it failed like they assumed, not only would have they lost money, but CARB and CFCP would blame them for the awful infrastructure. In their 2015 report with CARB now admits that things will be more expensive and these stations need money even after they are built or they will simply close down. Progress is slower building the stations, and CARB in that report said they probably need to ask for more money.

By 2018 there should be the cars promised on the road by 2014, and we should have our demonstration phase. This is the year Musk says people will realize how stupid fuel cells are right now. I guess we should check back then and find out if Musk or Toyota is right. Musk is assuming that Toyota and Honda build to their current plan, but the predictions from toyota on plug-in obstacles keep being proven untrue.