Toyota is playing a long game... Hybrids/PHEVs today, HFCVs as a halo product, and they can always enter the BEV market whenever they think the chemistry matures to the point that they can ship Prius like volume of product. However, I think they didn't calculate the damage they are doing to the Toyota brand in the meantime as they are forced to promote their existing lineup over BEVs.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Toyota 'Mirai' Fuel Cell Sedan
- Thread starter ivog
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Electric Vehicles
I still think that a BEV + HFC range extender is one of the sillier exercises.
When 90% of your driving is from the battery, and you mostly want the range extender for convenience on long road trips and for peace of mind of easy refueling, I would think that not_very_common Hydrogen fueling stations would be a rather poor choice for fueling and an expensive fuel cell would be a poor choice for the car. On the contrary: you want an inexpensive engine powered on easy to find gasoline.
So you can have an existing $33k Volt that 10% of the time has 230g/mi CO2 emissions, and can be quickly fueled at any service station, or you could put in the effort to design a $65k BEV/HFCV hybrid that 10% of the time has 250g/mi CO2 emissions and can only be refueled in a handful of places. How can the Hydrogen version possibly be better than the gasoline version?
Ironically, the company that has done the most to prove HFCVs are irrelevant is Toyota. Their brilliant work to get gasoline engines below 250gCO2/mi has really left 250gCO2/mi HFCVs lacking any raison d'etre. If you want very clean and fueled in your garage, you get a BEV; if you want clean and fueled on the road, you can get a Hybrid (e.g., Prius); and if you want a mix of those, you can get a BEV + range extender (e.g., Volt). If you want not-as-clean and fueled nowhere, you can get an HFCV. but who wants that?
flankspeed8
Member
A very well reasoned analysis. But, there is a large contingent of people on this board who would say that even 1 drop of oil is too much and they would bash the car as being a gas car with a battery extender in accordance with their BEV Dogma. But many are willing to look the other way because after all hydrogen is cleaner than fuel in their minds, not taking into account how that hydrogen is created. I have driven over 7.5k miles last year in my Volt on less than 5 gallons of gas, yet I don't drive an EV apparently...
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
The whole BEV dogma thread is about terminology, not about how much driving on oil is too much. A hydrogen PHEV would not be considered a BEV either.A very well reasoned analysis. But, there is a large contingent of people on this board who would say that even 1 drop of oil is too much and they would bash the car as being a gas car with a battery extender in accordance with their BEV Dogma. But many are willing to look the other way because after all hydrogen is cleaner than fuel in their minds, not taking into account how that hydrogen is created. I have driven over 7.5k miles last year in my Volt on less than 5 gallons of gas, yet I don't drive an EV apparently...
If we can get rid of conventional gas cars and sell just BEVs, PHEVs with substantial batteries, and some HEVs for when plugins aren't practical then we can reduce the remaining need for liquid fueling to the point where the PHEV range extenders and HEVs could plausibly be supplied by cellulosic E100 -- 100% very low carbon Ethanol. Brazil already has sizable numbers of E100 cars sold by GM etc. running on cane sugar Ethanol. The advantage of E100 is that it requires less processing. The Ethanol for E10 or E85 requires removal/drying of nearly all of the water in the Ethanol so it can stay mixed with gasoline. With E100, the last bit of water is no big deal. The downside of E100 is that it is harder to start the engine in colder temperatures (under 40F or so) but with a battery pack and larger motors for starting the engine I have to think that can probably be worked around in ways that are not possible with a conventional car's battery and starter design. Anyway, it's a happy fantasy for making gasoline go away entirely from use in normal passenger car vehicles even without needing fuel cell cars or making every last vehicle be a BEV.A very well reasoned analysis. But, there is a large contingent of people on this board who would say that even 1 drop of oil is too much and they would bash the car as being a gas car with a battery extender in accordance with their BEV Dogma. But many are willing to look the other way because after all hydrogen is cleaner than fuel in their minds, not taking into account how that hydrogen is created. I have driven over 7.5k miles last year in my Volt on less than 5 gallons of gas, yet I don't drive an EV apparently...
flankspeed8
Member
I don't know, but the silence is deafening. I read about 5 different EV/Green transport sites daily and there just seems to be no news, excitement or enthusiasm for this car. As I said in an earlier post, its almost like the car doesn't exist.
mspohr
Well-Known Member
It's not a Mirai, it's a Mirage. (def: something illusory, without substance or reality.)
RobStark
Well-Known Member
H2 is not backed by GREEN/EV supporters because the technology is not green.
It is backed by a small group of nationalist in the US,Japan,and Europe that see FCEV as a "realistic" alternative to BEVs and as a way for their countries to become energy independent from OPEC and Russia.
Over half of these FCEV advocates will not actually consider being an early adopter and will only buy a FCEV once FCEV are cost competitive with ICEv and fueling is just as convenient as gasoline. In other words never.
The primary buyers for FCEVs are people in the FCEV/Hydrogen industry and government bureaucrats in the transportation sector buying cars for government agencies and to a lesser extent for their own private cars.
dauger
Member
Whoa! Hold your fire. That target's a friendly.
Reread what flankspeed8 said. He was just referring to websites that follow green and EV-related happenings and was seeing no enthusiasm. E.g., greencarreports once reported on the Mirai but has no love for FCVs. Yes, FCVs are a boondoggle, and too many folks who think they're pro-environment are duped by the FCV cabal.
Getting back on topic, the recent radio silence around the Mirai is odd. I'm thinking Toyota is borrowing a page from Tesla: don't stimulate demand if all you'll end up doing is frustrating that demand. But the reason is entirely different: instead of supply constraints (Tesla) it's woefully underdeveloped infrastructure (Hydrogen fueling). Maybe Toyota thinks they can catch up on their 2016 necessary-for-compliance Mirai-sales quota later.
Seems like the only for us to find out if something's up is calling a Toyota dealership with those portable fill-to-half Hydrogen stations and ask for the latest. Anyone care to volunteer?
I think we've finally found something that Toyota is doing a better job at than Tesla: Not stimulating demand. Maybe Elon could learn a thing or two from them. :wink:
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Yes, Toyota money has CARB favoring a car made in Japan by a Japanese company over a superior California made car by a Californian Company.
It is insane. It makes you almost want to vote for Trump.
Well, not really but it sure does PMO.
My favorite CARB Factoid? One of the leading "scientists" at CARB, "Dr." Hein Tran, falsified his PhD. He bought it for $1000 on the internet and said it was from UC Davis.
Was he fired? Hell no. CARB knew about it, and hid the deception until the press found out.
Ed Hart
Member
Can anything be simpler than battery-electric vehicles?
Sometimes a picture truly IS worth a thousand words. In the case of a fuel cell electric car vs. a battery-electric car, the simplicity of battery power shines through. (See below) Hybrids solve a problem, but vehicle complexity is remarkable.
Let me add that in my daily driving I NEVER need to visit a charger away from home, so the argument about "refill time" is meaningless. On the long trips we have taken in the Tesla, the Supercharging network has performed seamlessly, and it takes just a small bit of planning to minimize any lost time. If you have not seen our report on the first coast-to-coast autosteer trip, you can see it here:Yorba Linda Vacationers First To Go Coast To Coast Mostly by Autosteer
Sometimes a picture truly IS worth a thousand words. In the case of a fuel cell electric car vs. a battery-electric car, the simplicity of battery power shines through. (See below) Hybrids solve a problem, but vehicle complexity is remarkable.
Let me add that in my daily driving I NEVER need to visit a charger away from home, so the argument about "refill time" is meaningless. On the long trips we have taken in the Tesla, the Supercharging network has performed seamlessly, and it takes just a small bit of planning to minimize any lost time. If you have not seen our report on the first coast-to-coast autosteer trip, you can see it here:Yorba Linda Vacationers First To Go Coast To Coast Mostly by Autosteer
Attachments
Last edited:
OK, I know it's old, but since others have posted in the thread, I'll come back to it...
Gasoline is the status quo, but it produces poisons at point of use.
If technological advances allowed affordable PHHFCV, then my point was that since PHHFCVs wouldn't need as much refueling infrastructure, and because the cost of hydrogen would only apply to a small number of miles, it would be much easier for them to succeed in the marketplace.
Then, since PHHFCV would have zero point-of-use emisssions, and reasonable refueling times for long trips, affordable PHHFCVs would raise serious questions as to whether there were any justification for continued use of gasoline in newer cars. The only reason to continue to allow the use of gasoline would be economic pragmatism.
But, I think that, as Jeff mentioned, E100 would be a more likely target. As plug-ins displace petroleum-based fuels, it becomes more viable to use biofuels and synthetic fuels. With perhaps 93% gasoline displacement, even current ethanol production would allow E100 to be used, and with higher displacement, less-intensive production methods could be used.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
It doesn't take just technology advances on the car side, but also on the station/hydrogen production side. The problem with a plug-in HFCV is that the infrastructure fails to meet the requirements of "range extension". The infrastructure is expensive (both to build and maintain), not readily available, and the fuel is expensive. And supporting a plug-in HFCV does not allow the infrastructure to progress naturally. The stations need lots of initial demand to sustain them, but when you add a plug, that reduces demand drastically (to 10% mark if you go by numbers estimated so far). And such a car will have to compete with not only conventional ICE based PHEVs, but also with long range BEVs (which are getting much cheaper).
I think all of those factors is why even though there have been a couple of plug-in HFCV concepts, all of the ones that have reached public hands are not plug-in.
I've been mentally wrestling with this. As one who would rather see our farmland used for feeding people instead of cars, E-anything is a problem for me. That said, given that significant H2 distribution between major cities is a long ways off, if ever, E-as-much-as-possible could help with the overall emissions problem. So that leaves local driving to be the opportunity for H2 Fuel Cells, but local driving is ideal for BEVs.
And I would bet that the between-cities infrastructure for fast / super charging would outpace H2 deployments, so inter-city travel would be best by BEV too.
So where does that leave the fuel cell?
Plug In EV with H2 Fuel Cell range extender SOUNDS good on paper, but perhaps people still remember the Hindenberg?
"Mary, I'll pump the hydrogen, you plug in the 440 volt fast charger, OK?"
"Screw you Bob. I wanted the freakin' Tesla dammit. I'll be in the coffee shop with insurance agent on speed dial."
"Mary, I'll pump the hydrogen, you plug in the 440 volt fast charger, OK?"
"Screw you Bob. I wanted the freakin' Tesla dammit. I'll be in the coffee shop with insurance agent on speed dial."
Similar threads
