Why Toyota Isn't All-In On EVs (cnbc.com) 373
During Toyota's annual dealer meeting in Las Vegas last week, which was called "Playing to Win," CEO Akio Toyoda explained why the company isn't all-in on electric vehicles. CNBC reports: Toyoda last week simply stated what he would like his legacy to be: "I love cars." Despite criticism from some investors and environmental groups, Toyoda this past week doubled down on his strategy to continue investing in a range of electrified vehicles as opposed to competitors such as Volkswagen and General Motors, which have said they are going all-in on all-electric vehicles. The plans could arguably cement Toyoda's "I love cars" legacy or tarnish it, depending on how quickly drivers adopt electric vehicles. "For me, playing to win also means doing things differently. Doing things that others may question, but that we believe will put us in the winner's circle the longest," he said [...]. Toyoda, who described Toyota as a large department store, said the company's goal "remains the same, pleasing the widest possible range of customers with the widest possible range of powertrains." Those powertrains will include hybrids and plug-in hybrids like the Prius, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles like the Mirai and 15 all-electric battery models by 2025.
Toyoda reiterated that he does not believe all-electric vehicles will be adopted as quickly as policy regulators and competitors think, due to a variety of reasons. He cited lack of infrastructure, pricing and how customers' choices vary region to region as examples of possible roadblocks. He believes it will be "difficult" to fulfill recent regulations that call for banning traditional vehicles with internal combustion engines by 2035, like California and New York have said they will adopt. "Just like the free autonomous cars that we are all supposed to be driving by now, EVs are just going to take longer to become mainstream than media would like us to believe," Toyoda said in a recording of the remarks to dealers shown to reporters. "In the meantime, you have many options for customers." Toyoda also believes there will be "tremendous shortages" of lithium and battery grade nickel in the next five to 10 years, leading to production and supply chain problems.
Toyota's goal is carbon neutrality by 2050, and not just through all-electric vehicles. Some have questioned the environmental impact of EVs when factoring in raw material mining and overall vehicle production. Since the Prius launched in 1997, Toyota says it has sold more than 20 million electrified vehicles worldwide. The company says those sales have avoided 160 million tons of CO2 emissions, which is the equivalent to the impact of 5.5 million all-electric battery vehicles. "Toyota can produce eight 40-mile plug-in hybrids for every one 320-mile battery electric vehicle and save up to eight times the carbon emitted into the atmosphere," according to prepared remarks for Toyoda provided to media. Toyoda also said the company has no plans to overhaul its franchised dealership network as it invests in electrified vehicles, like some competitors have announced.
"I know you are anxious about the future. I know you are worried about how this business will change. While I can't predict the future, I can promise you this: You, me, us, this business, this franchised model is not going anywhere. It's staying just as it is," he told dealers to resounding applause.
Toyoda reiterated that he does not believe all-electric vehicles will be adopted as quickly as policy regulators and competitors think, due to a variety of reasons. He cited lack of infrastructure, pricing and how customers' choices vary region to region as examples of possible roadblocks. He believes it will be "difficult" to fulfill recent regulations that call for banning traditional vehicles with internal combustion engines by 2035, like California and New York have said they will adopt. "Just like the free autonomous cars that we are all supposed to be driving by now, EVs are just going to take longer to become mainstream than media would like us to believe," Toyoda said in a recording of the remarks to dealers shown to reporters. "In the meantime, you have many options for customers." Toyoda also believes there will be "tremendous shortages" of lithium and battery grade nickel in the next five to 10 years, leading to production and supply chain problems.
Toyota's goal is carbon neutrality by 2050, and not just through all-electric vehicles. Some have questioned the environmental impact of EVs when factoring in raw material mining and overall vehicle production. Since the Prius launched in 1997, Toyota says it has sold more than 20 million electrified vehicles worldwide. The company says those sales have avoided 160 million tons of CO2 emissions, which is the equivalent to the impact of 5.5 million all-electric battery vehicles. "Toyota can produce eight 40-mile plug-in hybrids for every one 320-mile battery electric vehicle and save up to eight times the carbon emitted into the atmosphere," according to prepared remarks for Toyoda provided to media. Toyoda also said the company has no plans to overhaul its franchised dealership network as it invests in electrified vehicles, like some competitors have announced.
"I know you are anxious about the future. I know you are worried about how this business will change. While I can't predict the future, I can promise you this: You, me, us, this business, this franchised model is not going anywhere. It's staying just as it is," he told dealers to resounding applause.
Single egg-basket strategy isn't good (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Single egg-basket strategy isn't good (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: Single egg-basket strategy isn't good (Score:5)
Toyoda doesn't want to be the person whose legacy is that he killed all those companies and his retirement is looming. This is him kicking the can down the road so they the next guy can trip on it.
He offers a realistic view, not a political view (Score:5, Insightful)
Toyoda doesn't want to be the person whose legacy is that he killed all those companies and his retirement is looming. This is him kicking the can down the road so they the next guy can trip on it.
No. This is him looking realistically at the science, the engineering, the infrastructure and the supply chain. None of these things move at the pace demanded by politics. All EV by 2035 is an example of a political timeline, not one based on reality.
As we approach 2035, California will push the date back, or create exceptions, or otherwise adjust for reality.
Re: (Score:2)
You'd be shocked. Norway is already at 75% BEV market share right now.
Sure, they're a bit richer on average but also much colder and more dispersed despite similar total area.
Re: (Score:3)
You'd be shocked. Norway is already at 75% BEV market share right now. Sure, they're a bit richer on average but also much colder and more dispersed despite similar total area.
Yes, but they did so by choice. That tends not to artificially inflate prices like government mandates and other interventions that business can game to their advantage.
Yes, it amazing what a wealth oil exporting nation can do when government corruption is low. But few countries can gain the necessary wealth from oil exports to indulge in such luxuries.
Re: (Score:2)
So what do you think the limiting factors are?
In Norway 78% of new vehicles sold this year have been EVs. Not hybrids, battery electric. Norway is a big country, with a harsh climate. Somehow they are managing it in terms of infrastructure and suitability of the vehicles. Their cut off for ICE sales is 2025.
You mention supply chain. At the rate battery manufacturing is ramping up and being invested in, it seems unlikely that 12 years down the line there won't be enough available to meet demand.
Re: He offers a realistic view, not a political vi (Score:2)
Norway is an oil state much like Arabian countries, they have sufficient oil income to give all their residents a Tesla, Norway has actually been more wasteful with their revenues than Saudi Arabia. If oil falls off a cliff, those countries will be broke though, which a lot of Arabian countries are realizing and diversifying.
Not every country has the revenue to simply give their residents a servant and a car and a house. In most countries like the US an EV still costs more than 2 minimum wage yearly incomes
Re: (Score:2)
None of these things move at the pace demanded by politics.
No. They move at the pace demanded by consumers. (Be that consumers who are buying vehicles, or vehicle manufacturers buying parts).
All EV by 2035 is an example of a political timeline, not one based on reality.
The time between now and 2035 is longer than the time between now and the first viable EV hitting the market. That went through 8 years of doom sayers saying it was a dead end, or it couldn't be done. Until it was done. 10 years ago I laughed at the idea of a Tesla. Now basically every street in my suburb has at least one curb-side EV charging station (definitely outnumbering t
Re: (Score:3)
California will push the date back, or create exceptions, or otherwise adjust for reality.
Most likely they will greatly increase the percentage of vehicles that can be plug-in hybrid (I think currently they have a 20% allowance). They should just treat all hybrid plugins the same as EVs, and just make a rule that the hybrid battery pack can go 50 miles on a charge (which would cover most daily commuting).
Re: He offers a realistic view, not a political vi (Score:2)
Were it possible, I would bet $1M against you and give you 2:1 odds too.
Re: (Score:3)
Were it possible, I would bet $1M against you and give you 2:1 odds too.
It's totally possible... just print your own $1M bill. Governments do it all the time, we should get in on it too.
Re: He offers a realistic view, not a political vi (Score:3)
What of working class / retired buying modest ICE? (Score:3)
They can keep buying pre owned ICE cars after 2035 and nobody plans to stop them.
There are also the working class folks who buy a very modest and relatively inexpensive new car. As well are retired folks or others on fixed incomes that do the same. They are to be punished now, forced to the used market?
The only problem I see is nobody knows what the prices of gas and electricity will be in 10-15 years and what will happen to the gas tax that is currently part of the price of each gallon.
When the government manipulates the market, making one path a winner and the other a loser, things tend to not benefit the consumer. See federal involvement in the student loan market and the associated rises in tuition. Its easy for business to game the system in their favor when governm
Re: (Score:3)
OK so you're talking about hybrids. My original post about Toyota being far behind with only one lackluster model was in relation to BEVs ...
Yes, I got that in your first post. My original response was trying to point out that that is an insufficient perspective on the market. The hybrid market is nearly twice the BEV market and Toyota is not abandoning hybrid due to politics. Nor are they ignoring BEV. All that they are ignoring is the politics.
The notion that Toyota is somehow endangered by not jumping on the political bandwagon is ludicrous. They are #1 in hybrid, #3 in BEV.
So to reiterate, even though BEV is a relatively small slice of the market, Toyota (and all the Japanese brands really) are way behind almost every other region including the US (GM,Tesla), Europe (Jag,BMW,MB), Korea (which is basically just Hyundai), and China (great wall).
Toyota is #3 in BEV with 7.52%, Chevrolet #2 9.89%, Tesla #1 53.79
Re: (Score:3)
Toyota is #3 in BEV with 7.52%,
No, it isn't.
What BEV can I buy from Toyota right now in the USA?
Those figures were for 2018, Toyota didn't sell a BEV in the USA that year. What Toyota sold was PHEVs and FCEVs. No BEVs.
Re: Single egg-basket strategy isn't good (Score:4, Informative)
There is also the added challenge he mentioned WRT lithium and rare-earths that are needed for current-ben EVs. The mining will become challenging and the markets will drive prices up, not down. There needs to be an efficient way of extracting lithium from the sea, where loads of it is anyway. Maybe desalination will make head-way and the by-products will alleviate this hurdle. But not yet. I am on my second Tesla vehicle. I support the EV transformation, and I see the benefits as much as the next guy. However, regulation isnt the answer. Oil will become more and more scarce, driving up the prices, as battery tech and infrastructure ramp up to lower the costs of building and operating EVs. The free market will convince people that EVs are the better alternative, unless the regulation makes the graceful transition a hurried nightmare. I am not for that, not at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Oil will become more and more abundant as transportation and electric power consumption - over 60% of oil usage - falls off a cliff.
Re: Single egg-basket strategy isn't good (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
A choice of ICE may soon not be a choice at all - if the regulatory environment is changing as dramatically as politicians are posturing at the moment, ICE cars are simply a dead end. Buying one is like when Google is launching a new product - risky to adopt and even riskier to bet the farm on.
Don't get me wrong, it would be insane for Toyota to drop everything and go all-in on electric. But it's equally insane to me they are not focusing hard on an entry level small compact, like something in their Yaris r
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
To prevent a 2C average increase and catastrophic tipping-point anthropogenic climate change, we need to emit less than 2.1 tonnes of CO2e per person per year in total [iop.org] in the short term, and 0 tonnes by the medium term.
Average car use is 2.4 tonnes of CO2e per driver per year, just from the car [iop.org].
2.4+everything else > 2.1.
Electric cars average 1.15 tonnes of CO2e per driver per year, just from the car.
The options are clear:
Re: (Score:2)
Not the environment though, or the people suffering from the climate change created by fossil fuel vehicles.
Re: (Score:2)
Or the people suffering from the other kinds of pollution spewed by combustion engines right in the middle of densely populated areas.
Re: Single egg-basket strategy isn't good (Score:4, Informative)
> "Toyota can produce eight 40-mile plug-in hybrids for every one 320-mile battery electric vehicle and save up to eight times the carbon emitted into the atmosphere," according to prepared remarks for Toyoda provided to media.
Freakonomics came to a similar conclusion. Producing 1 car with 100% EV power is less effective than using the same amount of lithium to produce hybrid cars. If lithium is truly limited (and I believe it is) then is makes far more sense to give everyone partial electric power for a few kilometers.
Re: (Score:3)
Freakonomics came to a similar conclusion. Producing 1 car with 100% EV power is less effective than using the same amount of lithium to produce hybrid cars. If lithium is truly limited (and I believe it is) then is makes far more sense to give everyone partial electric power for a few kilometers.
Less effective by what metric? If the metric is amount of lithium used, then duh! If it's some other metric, what was the math and what axioms were used?
Re: Single egg-basket strategy isn't good (Score:2)
You are assuming the PHEVs are getting plugged in every night, or at all. There is no guarantee that they are. Some PHEV owners never plug-in.
The BEVs have no choice but to plug-in, eventually. A large battery in an EV means you don't require home charging, if you live in an apartment or rent and there is no possibility to charge at home.
I write this as an owner of both BEV and PHEV, a Bolt and a Volt, which both get plugged every night.
Re: (Score:2)
Lithium isn't functionally limited. True we could reign in the amount of battery we put in EVs - perhaps to 250-300km max, as this is way more than most people use. This would reduce the cost, and perhaps put them under the ICE threshold. The main issue right now is production. Why make a cheap car when you couldn't build enough to meet demand? Better to make more expensive cars at first so you can meet demand. Eventually all the car companies will get onboard and prices will drop.
Re: (Score:3)
Freakonomics came to a similar conclusion.
I suspect Freakonomics performed a shallow analysis. IMHO EVs are a much better idea than hybrids. Maybe Freakonomics only was looking at the short term, not the long term? Hybrids make sense when the cost of batteries is super high, but IMHO don't make sense any longer (and are a terrible idea in the near future and afterward).
I wanted an EV so I wouldn't any longer have a repair bill for a transmission problem, an emissions control problem, an oil leak, or any
Re: (Score:2)
If lithium is truly limited (and I believe it is)
Lithium exists in abundance. Don't be that "peak oil" person from the 70s whom we are all laughing at.
Re: Single egg-basket strategy isn't good (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Single egg-basket strategy isn't good (Score:2)
Toyota also operares on emerging(3rd world) markets that wont have charging infra for a while.
Hilux is a best seller and will be for a long while more.
Re: Single egg-basket strategy isn't good (Score:2)
Let the customer decide what is useful to them. I wouldn't snort so loudly in Toyota's direction if I were you. They were the pioneers in hybrids and single handedly made them mainstream. They are well positioned to see both sides of the supply chain here.
Re: (Score:2)
There are a number of things wrong with this. For one thing, for a Tesla at least, the standard warranty is 8 years or 150,000 miles. So, you won't have to pay to replace it inside 5 years. The price to replace it is more like 10k to 20k, so you're exaggerating the price of a new battery pack out of warranty. As far as good luck finding a charging station East of Las Vegas, take a look at plugshare [plugshare.com] and zoom in on the map and find a spot East of Vegas where you would be a long way from a charging station and
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What exactly makes me a Tesla fanboi? Just because I used one as an example? You're not very bright, are you?
Re: (Score:3)
They cost $40K today, and the price has been dropping as production scales up. Soon they will break even with ICE on the lot. Meanwhile a buyer of an EV is saving a bunch of money on fuel. Gas prices will only rise over time. Having had a EV for over three years now I can firmly say I'm never going back to ICE. Charging is more convenient than filling at a gas station, and the batteries last the life of the car, much like a gas engine. Yes, supply chains for lithium are ramping up, as are recycling systems,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That is nonsense. The manufacturing situation is entirely different than in the late 1800s.
Re: (Score:2)
When they just started building cars in the late 1800s they weren't about to run out of various metals to create them.
Shortages are part of literally every boom industry and that includes motor vehicles in the past. Mind you when discussing complaining about availability of materials it's wise to not consider anything which has happened in the past 2 years.
Ford right now literally can't get the materials to make the Ford badges that go on their cars. That's not an EV problem either. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/2... [cnbc.com]
We're not about to run out of materials to make EVs. What we do have is a supply chain disruption due to an u
He's rationalizing past bad decisions (Score:5, Insightful)
About 15 years ago, Toyota decided hydrogen was the future and went all-in with it. That wasn't a crazy prediction. At the time, neither electric nor hydrogen was ready to be mainstream. Batteries were too expensive and had too little capacity, and hydrogen infrastructure didn't exist. It wasn't clear which would win out.
Electric won out. That's been obvious for a while now. Batteries advanced faster than anyone predicted, while hydrogen infrastructure is still mostly nonexistant. But Toyota refused to admit it and stuck with hydrogen much longer than they should have. So now they're behind the rest of the industry, trying to give excuses why people should keep buying hybrids when most other companies have moved on. Seriously, you have a CEO still trying to sell hydrogen based cars while citing a lack of infrastructure for EVs? It's absurd.
Re: (Score:2)
Hydrogen is still a viable option, but only if there is infrastructural investment in solar/wind production of hydrogen (rather than using nat gas for it).
Re: (Score:2)
15 years ago, 2007. Nissan was developing the Leaf for release in 2010. Turns out the assumption that batteries were too small and too expensive was wrong. Nissan actually built the packs itself back then too.
I think it was obvious that hydrogen wasn't going to take off. LPG and other alternative fuels had existed for a while by that point, and failed to gain much traction. Lack of distribution and refuelling stations, neither a problem for electricity. Hydrogen was even worse, because it's difficult to sto
About BEVs' inmient inevitability (Score:5, Informative)
I can undesrtand why people living in countries like the USoA, China, Japan, the EU, Australia, the UK, Canda and the like may think that Fully Electric Vehicles are inevitable.
But, as a Velezuelan, with friends in LatAm, India, and the Magreb, I can offer a different perspective...
In Venezuela , the electrical infrastructure is not ready to the added demand to charge BEVs, we even have rolling blackouts, for crying out loud!
Think we are an exception, not the rule?
Take a look at Lebanon (the country of origin from my parents):
https://www.reuters.com/articl... [reuters.com]
And please notice that this article is from 2019, with cheap oil and gas, before Covid and the explosion in the beirut port...
I've travelled through LatAm (is the same), my friends in the Magreb tell a similar story.
What about India (5th largest economy in the world)? It paint a similar picture:
https://www.aeaweb.org/article... [aeaweb.org]
Again, 2016, Cheap oil, and long before Covid.
Do you thinkn from 2016 to 2022 it got better?
https://www.reuters.com/world/... [reuters.com]
TL;DR: NOPE!
Do you think all these countries will get their collective acts together by 2035 so they can madate ZEVs like California, NY, and many countries in Europe? My hope says yes, but my money says no.
Do everyone lives in a house where they can install a charger? What about us plebs that live in apartments? How much a public charger will cost? Or the works to install a charger in our parking spots will cost?
While I believe that BEVs are the future, my issue is with the word Inminent. Not even by 2035 will most of the world be ready for BEVs only.
In that sense, Toyota's hybrid strategy is a winner. Make BEVs for developed markets, Make plug-in-Hybrids (if serial better, instead of the Prius' paralell hybrid krap) for less sophisticated markets, and make ICEs where electrification is simply not possible.
Ah, and another thing, if any car maker is reading, and wants to help the environment (both air quality and global warming) ditch gasoline ICEs across all your range and go to 100% Natural gas cars.
Why you ask?
We need to keep extracting oil/petroleum, Otherwise, all those BEVs will not have tyres on wich to roll (the days of natural rubber are long gone), asphalt for the tarmacs, advanced composites to reduce weight, plastic of the insulation of the wire harnesses, lubricants for parts like the ball-bearings, insulating smalt for the wires inside the electric motors... and we humans would lack some important things (like medicines that involve oil derivatives)... and that oil/petroleum has natural gas asociated with it... since that natural gas has MANY times more greenhouse power than CO2, we need to burn it. I'd rather burn it in an ICE and get some work out of it, than burn it as a flare and get nothing...
But wait! There is more! We also need to keep drilling for natural gas itself! Not because the natural gass associated oil/petroleum is not enough... no no no no... but because we need helium.. and all the helium is trapped beneath the earth in wells that also has... you guessed it, natural gas. No helium, no LArge HArdron Collider, no JAmes Webb Space Telescope, No MRI exams at your local hospital... a Shame really...
All that natural gas that comes associate with the helium has many times more green house power than CO2, so we have to burn it. I'd rather burn it in an ICE and get some work out of it, than burn it flaring it and get nothing. Where did I hear that before? ;-)
Trust me, I was born and live in the country with the biggest flare site on the planet (Lago de Maracaibo, Venezuela).
So no, the whole world is not (and will be not for a long time) ready for BEVs, each an
Re:About BEVs' inmient inevitability (Score:4, Insightful)
In that sense, Toyota's hybrid strategy is a winner. Make BEVs for developed markets, Make plug-in-Hybrids (if serial better, instead of the Prius' paralell hybrid krap) for less sophisticated markets, and make ICEs where electrification is simply not possible.
And thank you for broadening the discussion a bit! I echo your sentiment that even in the US the situation is heterogeneous. Where I am we have 50c/kwh electricity, limited charging infra- BEVs don't make the most sense economically or practically, and adaption reflects this. Toyoda seems to think this variability will persist for a long time- and he may be right! Time will tell.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe in countries where gasoline is very expensive. 50c/kWh electricity is very expensive.
Gasoline has about 8.9 kWh/l. At $0.50/kWh, gasoline is worth about $4.45/liter in a theoretical 100% efficiency ICE.
A modern, efficient ICE (e.g. Skyactiv) gets about 40% thermal conversion, bringing the equivalent value of the electricity down to $1.78/liter ($6.74/US gal) in terms of gasoline.
An average efficiency ICE gets 25%, making the equivalent value $1.11/
Re: (Score:2)
Loosing the biggest and most profitable market is 'a winner'?
I agree that in many parts of the world ICE will still be used for quite some time.
Then again: we (Europe, Asia and North America) will need to get rid of quite a bit of ICE cars in the coming decades...
If you would ask if Toyota is planning to give up on their main market (Europe, Asia and North America) in favor of this market that is winding down, I'm sure they will say: "No we will do both".
Unfortunately: without putting absolute priority on c
Re: (Score:2)
South America is also a big ethanol market (see: Brasil). Ethanol-powered engines will be a thing there for awhile.
Re: (Score:2)
South America is also a big ethanol market (see: Brasil). Ethanol-powered engines will be a thing there for awhile.
You are correct, but ethanol-powered-engines ARE A THING RIGHT NOW there in Brazil ;-)
But remember, the brazilians need to burn their natural gas anyway (see: Petrobras), they would rather burn the gas in an ICE and get some work out of it, than burn it in a flare and get nothing ;-) That's why they do not cook with ethanol stoves, and have a healthy natural gas car market too...
Re: (Score:2)
That's what I meant. Ethanol engines and high-ethanol fuel blends have been prevalent for decades. That's not a market that will adapt quickly to EVs.
Re: (Score:2)
I can undesrtand why people living in countries like the USoA, China, Japan, the EU, Australia, the UK, Canda and the like may think that Fully Electric Vehicles are inevitable.
But, as a Velezuelan, with friends in LatAm, India, and the Magreb, I can offer a different perspective...
This is predominantly a peak demand problem, thankfully EVs don't charge (and don't have to charge) during peak demand. While EVs will reshape the power generation, the additional power generation capacity is expected to be within 3 to 5% and energy share will be ~10%. See analysis for India [inc42.com].
Do everyone lives in a house where they can install a charger? What about us plebs that live in apartments? How much a public charger will cost? Or the works to install a charger in our parking spots will cost?
Charging in apartment will be the key issue to address, they way it is happening in India is common slow/medium speed cheap charges are getting installed. These ar
Re: (Score:2)
While share of renewable in power generation keeps increasing, nobody has a solution for 100% renewable and gas powered electricity plants will play a role. Similarly oil/petroleum will also be used where it makes sense in large hybrid vehicles, aviation and even power generation. Even if there is a decline in overall usage, it will be sufficient enough to meet the non-energy demands. I think it is coal which will (and should) decline.
I think you're making an interesting point here: instead of burning natural gas in cars with the implied hazards, burning it in plants to produce electricity might be more efficient; so that everything converges to electric: gas, solar, nuclear, ...
That said, I also don't see some parts of the world massively convert to EVs in the near future. I wouldn't actually have cited India since India has a very dynamic economy and the ability to move pretty quickly, but I'd agree Maghreb/South America are still far
Re: (Score:3)
No single change will be 'the solution'. The problems are too varied and complex. It's the aggregate of small changes that will make a huge difference, ie harm reduction model.
If we waited for people to 'be ready' then it'd never happen. People like the status quo & stability vs some unknown future because change is scary. Future change is slightly less scary than "things are changing in the next few years".
If we had waited until everyone is ready for solar, the price of installing solar panels would st
Re: (Score:3)
You have rolling blackouts. So clearly your infrastructure needs a major upgrade. But EVs can actually help you here.
Many EVs support vehicle to grid. You can run your house/business off the EV's battery. For days if necessary. If you have solar panels or a small wind turbine you can use it as energy storage.
I the West people are already recycling EV batteries for use as stationary home batteries too. You can do it DIY, it's not all that hard. Maybe an opportunity for some business to get into recycling. Al
Re: (Score:2)
But, as a Velezuelan, with friends in LatAm, India, and the Magreb, I can offer a different perspective...
Nations with rampant corruption where bribery is commonplace all tend to have subpar electrical systems. I feel for the people of those nations but at the same time they need to cleanse their own cultures of the idea that criminal behavior is acceptable. I don't know how this can be done but if it is not then these nations will continue to languish like US physical infrastructure, they will remain on the verge collapse.
Corruption is rampant in china too (but severely punished), yet they are the biggest electric car market in the world, both in absolute terms and also as a %. And their electric system can cope with that (and high speed rail too)
Are they the exception to the rule? I do not think so, but my dinner is awaiting, so I'll not dig out more counter-examples ;-) ...
Is much more than simple corruption...
But yes, corruption plays a (large) part.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't mention motorbikes in your comment. Most countries in SE Asia are dominated by the motorbike, simply because they are cheap to buy and maintain. Are motorbikes popular in Venezuela?
Indeed they are! In the before times, was for people willing to avoid traffic/gridlock. Nowadays, is for the low cost reasons you cite. I did not mention it because the OG post was about cars, and my comment was too long as it was. I wanted to also talk about things like city buses, taxis and patrol cars, but that is another whole other can of worms.
But I do not own a mb. I Own a Corolla 2011 ICE car. And I had very bad luck and mine did not come with GNV out of the factory. Domage. (In Venezuela, you do no
I wonder how he could be so wrong (Score:2)
Granted, I own an EV and am all-in on it... but I think he is way off in his assessment (including the reasons offered). The transition is only limited by supply of EVs until you hit about the 80% penetration threshold. As you go above the threshold (whereever it may be), then you start to hit use cases where you need significant technology en
Re: (Score:2)
You may be right, in a US-centric view. Lots of countries aren't as close to ready for EVs as the US. Even the US has some serious challenges once adoption really picks up. For example, California's electric grid is nowhere near ready to support the strain of millions of EVs being charged all at once.
https://www.kpbs.org/news/envi... [kpbs.org]
Some of these problems of scale will soon become more starkly evident, and the solutions won't be easy to build out in just a few years.
They sell all over the world... (Score:4, Insightful)
You would need 20-30 years of infrastructure investment to get there.
EVs are way more expensive than regular petrol cars, typically closer to 2X that a cheap petrol car with similar specs, and in places where cars are considered luxury items, the more expensive cars fall in a higher tax bracket, making them even more expensive.
Re: (Score:2)
Why Is Toyota Doing This? Because they are smart (Score:2, Informative)
The EV silver bullet will be like all other populist silver bullets, nothing except to shoot the fanbois own feet with.
Solution (Score:2)
Re:Sunk Cost Fallacy (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't think the Toyota hybrid model WAS the wrong tech – for many years, after its introduction in 1997 (!), a Prius was the most energy efficient gas vehicle on the road. It used to be that you couldn't throw a stone in major west coast cities and not hit a Prius; they were astonishingly popular and ubiquitous. I drove mine for 10 years and it was phenomenally reliable, a little hollow toaster of a car that never had a moment's trouble. (That said, all it took was a low-speed [15 mph] direct frontal impact with a sidewalk light pole to total it. We weren't injured, but by the looks of it, Toyota subcontracted the front structure of the car to the same people who manufacture aluminum foil.)
However, the technology has indeed reached the end of it usefulness. It's disappointing to see such a leader in vehicle efficiency to not see the end of the road approaching for gas engines. They should have used those years of technological leadership to creating the car that would make the Prius obsolete.
Re: Sunk Cost Fallacy (Score:2)
Sorry to burst your bubble but the Honda Insight was actually the first to Market beating the Prius by a few months and far far more efficient with an entirely aluminum never rusting frame in both automatic and manual transmissions.
I average in the 70s with my 2000 with a manual transmission and can easily lean-burn up into the 90mpgs if I play the game.
Re: (Score:2)
The original Insight was a car very few people actually wanted to drive, though. The Prius, for all its faults, has evolved into a fairly pleasant driving experience.
You will notice that the updated Insight is only rated at 55/49 MPG. The current Prius can get up to 58/53 MPG.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd not say it is completely useless. IIRC, the #1 selling PHEV right now is the Jeep Wrangler 4xe. The fact that you have diesel torque when hill-climbing, and a ~40 km range before the four-banger cuts in is notable. A lot of commutes can be handled in that range, so for a lot of intents and purposes, the 4xe is essentially an EV without range anxiety.
Re:Sunk Cost Fallacy (Score:5, Insightful)
Car should be destroyed by impact, the impact energy is destroying the car instead of destroying their passengers. yes, cars can be much harder and almost like tanks, the WV beetle was build like that, you could destroy a house and the car still worked... sadly the driver was almost for sure dead...
so while a car can be badly damaged by low speed accidents (and be expensive to repair or replace), they all do that today to keep the driver as healthy as possible
Finally 15 mph may not look much, but also remember that a prius is a heavy car (compared with other similar non-hybrid cards), the impact force is directly related with both the speed and weight
Re:Sunk Cost Fallacy (Score:5, Funny)
It used to be that you couldn't throw a stone in major west coast cities and not hit a Prius
Yeah, well there's a court order that says I can't do that anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
It's hard to say if hybrid tech was a necessity or a lack of vision.
When the Prius debuted the battery was NiMH. Toyota actually had a full EV using a lithium battery, the Rav4 EV which debuted in 1997. Of course a low volume demo vehicle is not the same as the full production Prius, but it's interesting that they basically abandoned their early lead in BEV technology.
Over a decade later Nissan released the Leaf with a lithium battery. Only 24kWh, no thermal management, and yet it proved to be a practical c
Re: Sunk Cost Fallacy (Score:2)
Lithium production doubled though.
Re: (Score:2)
When somebody comes up with an EV that can do everything my Land Cruiser can do (doesn't even have to be better) then I would be happy to switch but today that doesn't exist. And I say this as somebody with an EV (one which cost a lot more than the Land Cruiser) which is a fantastic vehicle, it's quiet, comfortable and fast.
Will such an EV ever exist? Maybe or maybe diesel off-roaders will be hobbyist vehicles just like 2-stroke motorbikes, weekend vehicles for all the things that EVs can't do.
Re: Because they aren't stupid (Score:2)
If they charge 10x today's fuel cost for biodiesel in 2035, it could become a small hobby.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Batteries. Batteries. Batteries. (Score:5, Informative)
This article [arstechnica.com] gives a nice summary of some emerging battery technologies. There are a lot more options than you imagine. Many don't involve lithium or anything rare.
Are places that want more BEVs allowing more mines for lithium and cobalt?
Cobalt isn't essential. Many EVs on the market today have switched to LFP batteries that don't need any heavy metals, just lithium, iron, and phosphorus. As for lithium, the answer is yes. California for example is working to produce lithium from the Salton Sea [slashdot.org]. It also can easily be extracted directly from sea water. That's more expensive than getting it from more concentrated sources, but we're making good progress on bringing down the cost [science.org]. And of course, there are many battery chemistries that don't use lithium at all.
There's that MIT professor that likes to talk about making batteries from cheap materials but he's using molten metals, not something that is practical in a car.
Liquid metal doesn't necessarily mean high temperature molten metals. A lot of them involve metals that are liquid at room temperature, or only slightly above [rsc.org].
We have the means to produce zero carbon fuels. We don't have the means to produce enough batteries to go around. Not in any meaningful time frame.
That's a very strange claim to make. We already have a huge industry making batteries and producing the raw materials they need. That industry is investing massive sums in adding manufacturing capacity and increasing raw material production. On the other hand, we have essentially zero existing production of carbon free fuels. There've been some demonstration projects showing you can make diesel or jet fuel from CO2, but nothing has even been attempted on a commercial scale. What leads you to think the latter can scale up faster than the former?
Re:Batteries. Batteries. Batteries. (Score:4, Informative)
This entire post is essentially "no, weight it totally not a constraint in a vehicle bro. Here's a nice article from our evangelical believers that tell you that!"
Reality check: we use lithium in these applications specifically because it's the theoretically lightest chemistry that exists. The only thing that is better is lithium air. We have not a faintest clue how to make lithium air work. It's the fusion of battery tech, perpetually "twenty years away".
Everything else is heavier. To find out why, consult a Periodic Table near you.
And as for "but why does weight matter in a car", this is actually one of the Tesla's most hilarious fails. I.e. vapourware of Tesla Semi that was supposed to come out many years ago, and is likely to never come out because they probably finally asked someone with a clue "so what's the weight limit on the US roads for semi trucks?" And after they got the answer, there were probably a lot of "oh, so we're not making Tesla semi then. Well fuck" expressions in the room.
EVs are already extremely heavy and require usage of heavy duty suspension and chassis for the vehicle size compared to ICE vehicles. Due to the extra weight, they also cause significantly greater damage to road surfaces (which is why we limit the truck weight on both per axle and per entire unit basis in developed world). Additional weight also means much more energy to move the vehicle, as you're effectively moving a large amount of extra mass that needs to be accelerated. Basic physics.
Ergo, we use the lightest chemistry we know. Otherwise, we'd have long since gone with Vanadium batteries. Really easy solution if you ignore the weight. Just take the existing diesel and gasoline pumping infrastructure and have it pump Vanadium battery cathode and anode instead. You'll need some conversion work so that plugging in a hose will both inject charged cathode and anode as well as suction out the depleted ones, but this would be a fairly minor conversion of already existing infrastructure, not an installation of completely different infrastructure with EV charging stations.
But we can't do that, because we're severely weight limited on vehicles.
And that's before shortages. Short story there is that without Russia, we don't have EVs. They are one of the main suppliers on oil and gas, but they're also one of the main suppliers on at least three or four key inputs for building an EV. And since Russia is effectively out for foreseeable future, whatever plans anyone in the West had for large scale adoption of EVs went the way of the Nord Stream pipelines. And while propaganda will not relent for foreseeable future as journalistic profession is utterly infiltrated by the nutjobs from the Cult of Gaia who genuinely believe that "97% scientists agree that global warming is going to kill us soon" without ever having to looked at the source for that idiotic claim, much less comprehend the level of idiocy they regurgitate, reality has a way of asserting itself.
Through things like inflation. You can do what journalistic profession did, first claim that there will be no inflation, then claim that there will be a little, then claim that yeah there will be some but it's going to be fine. Then claim that it's going to be a lot, but that's actually really good for the economy. And then after you have once again crashed in "how much does public trust you" to another record low, you have to stop regurgitating the crap and actually look into the issue.
And same will likely happen with "we're totally moving to EVs, honest" narrative in a few years as reality will assert itself.
Re: (Score:2)
I presume by lithium you mean the current lithium chemistries, since you go onto mention lithium air. But there is another promising Lithium chemistry. Lithium Sulphur. It has twice the energy / weight density, and twice the energy / volume density. In recent year they's push
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, hello again. It was just three months ago that you posted a bunch of FUD about EVs and I responded to you. Here we go again!
vapourware of Tesla Semi that was supposed to come out many years ago, and is likely to never come out
You can't claim you haven't been told because I told you three months ago: real Tesla Semi prototypes are driving on real roads carrying real cargos, and they are not exceeding the weight limit.
https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=21451688&cid=62590964 [slashdot.org]
EVs are already extremel
Re: (Score:2)
Cobalt isn't essential.
No cobalt and the mass increases per energy stored. All the technologies mentioned in the article you linked to have lower energy density than lithium-cobalt, and that is going to impact performance and therefore viability for use. If we assume BEV includes things beyond those that travel by roads then energy density is an even bigger problem. Even with new chemistry we aren't going to see the 10x improvements in energy density we saw before, maybe we could see a 2x improvement, most likely we see energy
Products for reality of the market, not politics (Score:4)
Toyota needs to realize something soon. Either they switch solely to EVs, or they will go bankrupt, done away by Tesla, Chinese makers, and the competition selling EVs.
You need to realize that Toyota makes and will continue to make hybrids and EVs. They are participating in this new market of electric vehicles, they are competing with all those you list. What they are saying is that in realty, political goals like 100% EV by 2035 are unrealistic. That they will design the product line for the reality of the market, not for politics.
As for other automakers claiming they are going 100% EV by [insert political date here], as the date nears they will simply announce that an ICE production line will remain in operation for longer than "planned" to satisfy the market needs. These other automakers are just playing along with the politicians, and all of them know the schedule will slip.
Re: Products for reality of the market, not politi (Score:2)
What people need to get is that usa/eu market is just a portion of toyotas business.
Thats how they're not in the gutter in the first place, usa market isn't even that important.
Like f, they got ev tech. Its not like they didn't have or weren't putting more money into ev research than most other manufacturers. But they also sell in markets that people don't buy ev's for now. You can't replace a 1.9l hilux with an ev of comparable capability and load modding potential without kicking up the price to the moon.
Re: (Score:2)
Horses were viable when population densities were low but became unworkable in cites as they grow to significant sizes. Go read some history books about city streets cica 100
Re: (Score:2)
> You clearly have never owned a horse.
I've never owned a horse... and contrary to leftists I've never owned a human being either. However, if those are the accounting rules you're applying then humans will never be carbon neutral. In fact, our diet of out of season foods from across the globe is even more of an ecological disaster. So then you paint yourself into an ideological corner where you have to admit that the only solution is less people. And if there are few enough people, they can all driv
Re: (Score:2)
That of course is the operation difference but the s
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No TRD is short for Turd, duh!
Re: (Score:2)
Wut? Their biggest sellers are the Corolla and Camry - small to medium passenger cars.
Re: (Score:3)
I could take issue with many of your other points but can be bothered. For example for taxis just take look at the
Re: (Score:2)
Current price in the United Kingdom is 0.38 USD per unit (kWh).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget that EVs are currenly placed in the most expensive insurance groups, too.
Re: (Score:2)
Even without towing, the newest Teslas can only do 200 miles on the motorway, and they cost 50g GBP. Meanwhile, I have a 1000 GBP car which does 500 miles easy and gives me the convenience, heat and the feeling of safety I need in all conditions.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because we don't fancy spending 50,000 GBP on a car which can only do 200 miles in motorway conditions, and in the UK the motorway performance DOES matter. People here commute daily significant distances to work via motorways. It's just the reality of this country.
Re: (Score:2)
Back in the actual UK, less than 4% of people commute more than 40 miles to work.
Now I know that flavor is filled with the kinds of exceptional people who commute 200 miles daily towing a horse box and who's 37 BMI is all muscle etc, but you know we're talking percentiles not even averages here. And big ones like 95.
Re: (Score:3)
No lots of people don't has trucks. America is not the whole world. How many times do you have to read the letters U and K before you realise that you're holding forth on a country you clearly know nothing at all about?
And anyway, SUVs don't have much cargo space and pickup trucks only have a lot if you don't mind it getting wet. Guess how useful that is in old Blighty, eh? There's a reason tradies use vans not trucks here. We also don't get hurricanes.
The rest of your post is based on the most peculiar hyp
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Because they're dumb? (Score:2)
Just look at where the f toyota makes most their money at and it'll make sense. They're rich enough to not research just one thing.