By - YouHaveTakenItTooFar
It's because they've invested so much into hydrogen and hybrid tech that they are not willing to cut bait and instead keep investing and lobbying in a vicious cycle.
They also invested into hydrogen because 95% of hydrogen production worldwide comes from natural gas.
Why would Toyota care about the origin of the Hydrogen.
Btw Japan as a country is heavily banking on Hydrogen, they are probably a lot more dubious of battery technology after China used massive tariffs to screw them on rare earth minerals.
As someone who has been in Japan for the last 10 years, it's amazing that when I came here I could find hydrogen refill stations somewhat commonly, but it's been phased out. Electric is definitely winning over here
Also in Japan and barely see any recharge stations, but I am in the countryside and never go into cities.
Around these country areas, electric isn't going to be very popular, as cars are often parked outside, and would be a pain to try and get power setup to recharge.
> Around these country areas, electric isn't going to be very popular, as cars are often parked outside, and would be a pain to try and get power setup to recharge.
Most chargers are just glorified extension cords, and are built to be installed inside or out. So you just put the charger near the parking spot. I don't see the issue.
Doing it at scale is the challenge. Sure you could relatively easily add 2-3 outlets to most buildings, but if you wanted to do 20 or 30? That’s a different story. Your options are to do 110v circuits, which charge laughably slow (I’m talking ten minutes charging to drive for five miles), or 220 circuits, which are not fast but can at least be useful. So if you want to add 20-30 220 circuits to your building, can your panel and circuit support it? Likely no, and in most cases you’re going to be calling your utility company to get another set of mains brought in so you can handle all the extra load. Get out the checkbook.
I have no doubt we will get there, but this is the kind of infrastructure challenge that needs to be addressed. On the plus side, it is at least cheaper to run more power cable than it is to run gas pipes etc.
Yes, your right, apartment buildings are going to be a challenge, but it's doable. It's not going to be cheap, but it's on par with a roof replacement or other capital outlays. The places that do this will be able to charge more initially, same as having cable TV or good internet or a pool or a party room. After a few years this will become standard and they'll have to do it to keep up.
Also there are not large apartments in the country side, which is what the OP was taking about.
Japan as a country "works" for hydrogen. High population density cities with relatively little barren area between them.
You basically need to lay pipeline in order for hydrogen fueling stations to be practical. That's part of the reason EV stations are everywhere yet there's like a 500 mile radius you can take a hydrogen car in the US.
Why do you need a pipeline? What do you think the end goal for hydrogen use is and who is the customer and why? I hope that doesn't come off as condescending, but it's something that I think a lot of people don't consider.
For everyday cars I agree with you 100%. It's difficult and expensive to make the infrastructure. We already have electric utilities everywhere.
But for things like long haul trucks or delivery trucks or even forklifts it starts to make sense. These things all have a home base and/or regular routes. All you need are a handful of locations every few hundred miles and a means to support dumb people who forget to fill up in between.
Right now? I think the only hydrogen car you can buy in the US is the Toyota Mirai - a sedan which has a nominal MSRP scaling to $66,000.
I assume that's Toyota taking a play from Tesla's playbook and using the fat-margin (and relatively forgiving) upmarket sedan segment for their test mules. On the other hand, unless you are located in southern California, you literally cannot drive this car. There is no fueling infrastructure for it anywhere else.
So as of now I think the target market for hydrogen cars are "wealthy established (old) people looking for a technologically advanced, unassuming looking car which disguises their $65,000 purchase as a $25,000 purchase, who are located between San Diego and Los Angeles and own another vehicle to use if they want to drive somewhere else"
I haven't seen any fuel cell vehicles or fueling strategies on the immediate horizon which mirror your ideas - which I'll admit make the most compelling case for fuel cell tech I've heard yet. Mostly just concepts and studies - the stuff the BEV market was doing in the mid-00s
I don't mean this unkindly towards anyone who likes hydrogen tech or is involved with it in any way, but it's looking more like Betamax vs VHS everyday. Sure it's got some unique capabilities, but battery electric cars are so far ahead in developing an economy of scale that hydrogen may never catch up in most global markets.
Those are personal cars. I'm talking about commercial applications. And they're all over the place. Renault is one of Europe's largest car and commercial vehicle manufacturers.
Not who you are replying to, but I see hydrogen as beneficial to some, but only if it's pure green. As a petrol head, there are some cool things about a hydrogen sports car, in that it COULD have the benefits of range and lightness that a petrol car has while offering the power of a BEV. Here in Australia I'm anticipating that the highways between capital cities will have regular H2 stations designed for trucks, but will also be used by cars. So you can go out on day trip when ever you want guilt free. Our government has set a target of $2/kg for H2 fuel which going on the mirai would cost $12 to fill up, though there will be additional costs of course.
But for me the huge caveat is that it needs to be green, not fossil fuel generated.
Serious question: can our current electrical infrastructure handle an increased load from additional EV cars being charged?
Edit- And the survey says: >!no!<
Are current infrastructure today if everyone switched overnight, probably not. But the transition wont happen overnight as people switch the infrastructure will be upgraded. But the upgrades that are needed are not as extensive as people think. People think that electric cars will require a new higher capacity curciute breaker pannel to handle handle the load when in reality your typical home car charger can be plugged into a dryer outlet and more than handle the requirements of charging an electrical car. So if your pannel can handle adding another dryer it can easily handle an electric car.
You will hear people quote huge amp numbers for teslas like 70-80 amps for charging. These are the max rate they can charge at off a 220 outlet. So if you have the capacity and want to charge faster you can set up a 70 amp charger. In reality 30-40 amp 220 is more than enough to charge your tesla overnight and most home chargers charge at about this rate which is again about as much as a dryer or an oven.
So the upgrades needed for the grid are not really a big deal. People are using more electricity every day anyway with ac more electrical appliances and bugger houses so the grid is already upgraded every day to handle this.
As a union electrician who installs EV charging stations occasionally, there are plenty of households that will need a service/panel upgrade to safely accommodate a charger.
I mention this not just to be pedantic, but because Ive had to upset customers before when they think a simple affordable job is gonna cost a lot more.
From my understanding new building codes require planning ahead for a EV charger. It's often referred to in plans as, "for future use".
With that said not all townships have adopted the most recent building codes. And of course this does not apply to remodels or older homes.
You are right that the transition won't happen overnight, but the introduction of EV chargers in more homes isn't easy for many homeowners.
Our infrastructure requires upgrade anyways, EVs becoming more common is just another reason to upgrade.
I would love to see 3-phase 480a offered to residential customers which would increase charging speeds and decrease amperage loads.
Residential 3-phase would be lovely. I’d much rather dump cash on that than a rotary phase converter/ VFD
Absolutely, Ive come across plenty of folks set on 3-phase until they know the cost of making it available to them and/or the commercial rates you will be charged.
Edit: You can get 320a single phase, but not sure if it's charged residential rate or not. The one 320a service I built was for a small concert venue and it was much cheaper than trying to get 3-phase, that's for sure.
Also worth noting that most cars will be charged at home overnight, when usage is very low, and will mean that you won’t have the situation in areas with lots of wind generation, where the turbines have to turn off as there isn’t enough demand. That capacity can be utilised.
Low until everyone is using it to charge their car at night.
Good, it encourages the grid to be upgraded then.
Every societal improvement required upgrades, imagine before we all had electricity how crazy the thought of ever house having electricity would have been. Yet now everyone does have it.
> Low until everyone is using it to charge their car at night.
Newer EVs also have some capability to feed power back into the grid, if needed. The support must be added by the manufacturer and the utility companies, but the standard exists.
It's called [V2G, aka Vehicle to Grid](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle-to-grid)
Completely agree with your comment. Just want to correct the amperage Tesla’s utilize at home. Max is [48 amps](https://www.tesla.com/support/home-charging-installation/wall-connector#charging-speeds).
That requires a 60 amp breaker, though.
I had read a while back comments and posts like these specifically mentioning 72 amps available for the model S. Is that not acurate anymore?
What about a multiple car situation? If 2 or even 3 or 4 cars and a dryer would you end up having to upgrade or can the lines to the house handle that and it is just a matter of upgrading the home itself?
Houses are usually 100 or 200 amp service. I think 200 amps is more common for newer homes, but I don’t know for sure. Maximum output for a Tesla home charger is [48 amps](https://www.tesla.com/support/home-charging-installation/wall-connector#charging-speeds), so if the home has 100 amp service you probably can’t run 2 at full capacity at the same time. But you can control how many amps you want the car to charge at. So if you had three Model 3s charging at the same time at 16 amps each, you’d be gaining 15 miles of range per hour. Overnight that’s plenty.
On a 200 amp service, for sure.
> What about a multiple car situation? If 2 or even 3 or 4 cars and a dryer
If you can afford that many EVs and have that situation, you can afford a consultation with an electrician. Some states even offer rebates on zero-emissions related installation expenses.
IMHO The truth is our current infrastructure has been under maintained for 2 decades. As seen in California and Texas over the last 10 years we need massive investment to modernize our electrical grid. This demand and needed government infrastructure policies will hopefully force its modernization despite the free-markets constant under-maintenance spending/maximum revenue-draining approach.
Can our current hydrogen infrastructure handle an increased load from additional Hydrogen cars being filled?
Will our current Petroleum infrastructure survive unchanged a decreased load from reduced internal combustion cars being filled?
(the answer to all is "no". No shit change requires change)
I've read that Japan thinks it can use its existing gas station infrastructure and repurpose to distribute hydrogen
We recently had a minor fuel crisis in the UK, mostly as a result of everyone trying to fill at once. Petrol and diesel was widely unavailable for around a week, with queues lasting several hours where there was availability. The next time someone asks whether the grid can handle everyone charging at once, the response will be “how did the fuel stations cope?”
It’s a pointless question, because the scenario is mostly hypothetical.
Will the humans survive countinued use petroleum, not for much longer. So really they can right get fucked whining. The government needs to ball up and start forcing the rollover to less climate damaging power and locomotion.
Very high energy usage processes like steel and aluminium. Chemical processes that rely on high temperature. These are the hardest processes to electrify. These just need massive energy to heat up a lot of mass. Steel still mostly uses cokes (coal) because we haven't really changed the way we make steel since 1853. These processes can definitely make use of hydrogen at large scales.
So why pipelines? Mostly because we already have them. The chemical processes often rely on natural gas supply for heating. We've already started retrofitting our natural gas pipelines into hydrogen pipelines. Just like we retrofitted them 60 years ago from two gas to natural gas.
Why can't we use the existing gasoline (petrol) infrastructure?
I haven't done a lot of research into this but couldn't they just deliver hydrogen to repurposed fuel stations by truck as they do with gas?
That's a good thought, but there are problems. Petrol is stored as a liquid at atmospheric temps and pressures. Hydrogen can be stored as either as a liquid or gas. At atmospheric pressures and temps it's a gas. If it's stored as a liquid it'll be pressurized and at cryogenic temps. Usually done for storage or transportation. If it is a gas it'll be at very high pressures (thousands of psi or hundreds of bar). You might be able to transport it a low pressure in a gas form still however. The major issue with that would be loss of hydrogen.
Most fuel cells use the gaseous form of hydrogen to function. The issue with hydrogen is by mass it's very energy dense, but you need a lot of space to store it. Basically the exact opposite of batteries which are energy dense by volume, but very heavy (don't take up as much space and weigh a lot).
Hydrogen is also difficult to contain since hydroxy atoms are tiny.
Hydrogen gas is a very small molecule. It leaks out from conventional oil &gas pipes like water from a sieve.
There are only a handful of locations in the world that have pipelines capable of transporting hydrogen gas.
Your typical natural gas line pipe can only hold about 8% hydrogen by volume, with the remainder natural gas. That sets a limit for how much you can sweeten the domestic gas supply to offset CO2 emissions
Not sure if Toyota has more hydrogen vehicles other than the Mirai, but the Mirai has a battery. It’s basically an electric car with a hydrogen fuel cell supplying the voltage to the battery.
Yeah. We need more nuclear, wind and solar in Ca, for hydrogen, desalination and refilling Reservoirs and alakline lakes, like ownens flats, salton sea. But they up and moved to TX cause Oil and ICE means. Doubling down on halting everything. And wonder why Hydrogen after a decade has shit for stations. They flipped off their base chasing the truck crowd.
They going to Texas has everything to do with taxation.
> salton sea
The Salton Sea needs remediation, not refilling.
What's your point?
Is the hydrogen slurry viscous in nature?
First comment to point out the typo. I'm starting to lose faith in Reddit
Hydrogen tech is not inherently bad and likely required for large vehicles. It also offers longer range and quicker refill compared to batteries. Most of the information on it on reddit seems to be FUD or saying that because its currently natural gas it always will be.
It's also good for people who are not willing to charge vehicles after dark. My mother refuses to buy an electric car until she can drive 8+ hours because she is not willing to charge in a spot off the highway for forty minutes
Hydrogen isn't inherently bad, just everything about the engineering of it as a fuel source for cars is.
Cars aren't "large vehicles". Freight trains and container ships are.
If we can get shipping to adopt ANY emissions controls it’d make sure a huge difference.
They burn diesel instead of bunker while in port. So that's something I guess.....
Thats just nox port emissions, and aren't any better from a co2 perspective. Need countries to "jones act" pollution for lack of better words before shipping will change
hydrogen fuel cell technology is great, the problem is that we have basically no hydrogen fuel stations. It is basically where Tesla was 5+ years ago with no super chargers, except worse off since with Tesla you could at least charge overnight from your home.
Their real enemy is public transportation not necessarily the type of car. To really address climate change now, we need mass transport and less cars on the roads. That is key IMO. We can all have the ability to have our private transport but that really kills all of us from the manufacturing to the excessive emissions of many cars on the road or the fact of where electricity comes from (pollution is also a killer) to the disposal of the vehicles.
It’s a chicken and egg problem because in the U.S. and other countries, cities are still being designed around 1960s highway design. You can add rapid bus routes and streetcars all you want, but cities need to be built more densely and in a walkable manner for these alternatives to take root at a critical mass.
Viscous cycle....sounds like a sticky situation.
A large part of that is China. They've gotten repeatedly fucked by China on the rare earth metals required for advanced battery tech that they aren't willing to take the risk on a country even the USA seems hesitant to challenge. I don't blame them one bit for betting on hydrogen.
But hydrogen fuel cells are dope. What's wrong with them?
Oil and gas companies are pushing hydrogen to replace natural gas and petrol so they can keep harvesting natural gas, turning it into hydrogen in a process that creates CO2, and then selling the hydrogen. Because it's easier for them to do that than to accept their industry dramatically downsizing and thus having to change industries and learn an entirely new skillset.
Hydrogen, when made from green energy and electrolysis, will be an important part of the green revolution because it can decarbonize some things that electricity can't, like steel smelting and potentially long-haul aviation. For right now, it's being used as an excuse by polluters to hamstring other technologies that would make a bigger impact immediately.
It may not ever be as good as batteries for cars due to hydrogen storage limitations, but if it is, it will be another decade before hydrogen is where batteries are now.
Also, why develop another industry that will consume ungodly fuck loads of fresh water to try to replace petrol, when fresh water scarcity is arguably the single biggest looming issue with climate change? If they can figure out how to get it from seawater, that's fine, because we're gonna need that freshwater for food and people more than we'll need it for a new burnable fuel when we can use electricity instead.
> Oil and gas companies are pushing hydrogen to replace natural gas and petrol so they can keep harvesting natural gas,
No they aren't.
Hydrogen from Oil and Gas can not be used in a Fuel Cell.
Even the tiniest amount of Hydrogen Sulfide will poison and ruin the fuel cell.
> But hydrogen fuel cells are dope. What's wrong with them?
Producing the hydrogen that they use as a fuel is inherently inefficient.
Additionally, the only production fuel cell vehicle for sale in the US, the Toyota Mirai, uses that power from the hydogen fuel cell to... charge its battery, as it's really an EV past the fuel cell, just with a very small battery.
For all that, just improve the batteries and charging infrastructure, and skip the hydrogen steps.
it only uses it batteries two compensate for the slow engagement of fuel cells. when maintaining a constant speed it's all h2.
source: what the info dash says when I drive my mirai around.
Because EV is the better way to go. We already have the infrastructure for it and you can create electricity at your home. Can you make hydrogen fuel at your home?
Guess I'm not buying a Toyota next upgrade.
Vote with your money
I made the same decision but for different reasons. When Ford finally announced a hybrid and electric truck. I have been a die hard Toyota fan for 2 decades but I do believe i'm going to get Ford's electric truck next. It can act as a stanby backup generator for your house, for several days or more on a single charge depending on your energy use habits. I'm already sold on that feature alone.
This is basically where I've landed too. My Lexus vehicles are probably going to be replaced with electric Ford vehicles in a couple years.
Considering the problems I’ve had with my Ford, I’m going back to Toyota or Lexus.
I'm just afraid the first generation(s) of the Ford Lightning EV truck will be full of nightmare problems, with a $15,000 battery change pricetag at the 'end' (5 years? 7 years? whenever the warranty runs)
If you preorder now, you wouldn't get it until 2024 at the earliest, so I'm sure most of the bugs will be ironed out by then. Thus far, batteries have lasted longer in EVs than expected.
Toyota makes vehicles that have a longer life span than any other brand. That means a lot more to me than obstructing climate change policies.
It’s true. I still have the same 02 Tacoma and I am keeping it till I die
Their hybrid car platform is great but they’re way behind on EV technology. We just bought a new bought a new 7 seater hybrid and would happily go electric with our next purchase, but that’s ten years away now.
We got a Toyota Venza this past spring and are getting 39 mpg in it with my wife's lead foot.
Like you we'll drive it for ten years and re-evaluate electric for the next car.
I'm getting 90 mpg in my Prime and I drive 100 miles per day. I love the flexibility of getting 800-900 miles on a tank. As much as I want a pure electric I have to say my battery/hybrid is kicking ass.
Plug in hybrids with a pure EV mode always seemed like the best option to me.
I can use 100% electric when I'm driving to work, and can use gasoline when I'm driving 800 miles in one day to visit family.
I second this. Just got a hybrid Tucson I love but if the Plug in would’ve been around I’d have loved that
Pacifica PHEV checking in. Although the all electric range isn't very large, it's enough to get to and from work. And on long trips we can easily fill up on gas without worrying about finding a charging station. It's the best of both worlds until we get better energy density batteries
I would have picked the hybrid option for the Pacifica but we needed the 8 seats and sadly somehow that isn't offered in the hybrid setup which still confuses me. A minivan is the perfect setup for short range electric given how many of the trips are short. Not having stow and go seats I could have lived with but not the 8 seats sadly. So, in 10 years I'm sure we'll also be in the hope for electric.
But you lug around the gas engine, fuel, fuel tank, and all that other stuff the 98% of the time you’re not on a long road trip. Wasteful for efficiency and manufacturing of all that stuff. People are far too afraid of not being to drive very long distances without stopping. I’ve owned an EV for 6 months now, and it’s really not a big deal. You get over that fear after 2 weeks.
I imagine adding a ICE on top of an EV is expensive, what price difference is there between a hybrid and straight up EV?
Might be infrastructure, but in Canada most gas stations on the highway have electric superchargers (which have vacancies 99% of the time I've seen them). Petrocan pushed hard and have a network at all of their highway stations, the Irving-owned ones have them as well.
If you're driving 800 miles, you'll probably stop to eat, piss, buy snacks, stretch your legs, etc. every few hundred miles. If charging takes 30 minutes to go for another 4 hours it doesn't seem that inconvenient to me...
Unless you're like my family where we just swap drivers and drive halfway across the country in one sitting, that is.
With the rate the industry is moving right now, Toyota may be your only option if you choose NOT to go electric in 10 years.
Honda seems behind the times too. Even their hybrid selection is quite lacking.
I don't see Mazda giving up on petrol engines anytime soon. They're even still trying to bring back the rotary with their new hybrid.
I work for Toyota and one of the many company wide messages a few years ago was about how they’re aiming for an all electric option for every model they make down the road.
Oh I'm sure they are, it would be silly not to at this point, but they are currently behind the bulk of the industry with EVs right now.
Seems like everyone is really with Tesla being the only one with reliable charging stations for the most part.
And they're opening their stations up to everyone.
So Tesla will own the gas stations.
Really surprised the expansion wasn’t faster. Feels like a no brained. 30 min to an hour at a supercharger? Just tell me people won’t feel compelled to run inside and buy a snack or a drink a lot more often while they’re a waiting so long.
There will still be ICE cars rolling of the production lines from most companies until 2030 and cars are expected to live for on average 20 years.
So you gonna be able to pick up some second hand ICE cars in 2031 no problem tbh.
I also got a Venza in the spring and I can’t seem to get better than 34 no matter what I do. Then again I live in a city with wildly aggressive traffic.
I honestly with I’d gone electric but my next car will also be years away now.
> they’re way behind on EV technology
They're ahead of everyone by a massive mile in solid state batteries, at least in terms of number of patents.
But that doesn't matter when everyone else has actual products on the market compared to them. GM and Ford and making a huge pivot to EV.
That matters a lot actually. Whoever wins the battery race wins the EV race. Designing the car is the trivial part for Toyota. Besides, they are releasing EVs in China this year and in other markets next year.
No they aren’t. Patents don’t have to mean anything. It can merely be an idea. If they were ahead of everyone, they’d have someone out already.
Patents are either a nothing burger or a massive investment in R&D. Seeing as they have a solid state prototype already, that wasn't just bullshit patenting. They have been working with Panasonic and revealed their prototype I think last year.
Fuel cells are their future, and if they can corner that market it's got a more promising long term outlook than ev. The biggest problem is hydrogen can be difficult to manufacture and ship.
But I would bet that someone works out a solution to use solar power and water to do it at small scale within the next 10 years. People will have their own fuel station at home, using nothing more than sunshine and water. And if it gets to that point then why run anything on the grid at all? Power your whole house with the fuel cell.
The latest article about there close to market BEV says Toyota will go a three pronged approach with hydrogen cell, BEV and hybrids
>But I would bet that someone works out a solution to use solar power and water to do it at small scale within the next 10 years. People will have their own fuel station at home, using nothing more than sunshine and water. And if it gets to that point then why run anything on the grid at all? Power your whole house with the fuel cell.
Do I got news for you!
The list goes on.
But if you produce your own electricity its better to just use it as needed and just make hydrogen with the spare for rainy days.
Like if you have solar you can just use that intead of wasting a ton of it to convert to hydrogen.
I'm driving a 2013 Prius that my mom bought new, I haven't bought gas in 6 weeks, and I still have half a tank. EV is great, but hybrid still makes a big difference when people keep them for a long time. I'm 99% sure that buying a new Tesla would have a more negative impact than keeping my Prius for 3+ more years due to the manufacturing of the Tesla.
You're comparing the difference between buying a brand new vehicle to a used one (that you probably got for a killer deal if not free). I'm not sure of the relevance to the article.
We had the same discussion dumping our old diesel. Figured it was better to switch now, in a few years that diesel might be worthless, now driving electric I'd guess hybrids might also lose a lot more value than they used to...
I guess this might be obvious to everyone but me, but there's a nuance to the headline: They aren't "pro climate change", they just bet on the wrong horse (fuel cell tech) and then compounded their error by working to buy political influence to try to sabotage the other "horse" - battery electric vehicles.
My guess is - someone or some people in Toyota made the decision and there was too much honor or investment tied up in it to change. I really love Toyota, and hope they figure this one out because I would like to buy an electric 4Runner from them sometime in the future.
They're coming out with the "bZ" series, FWIW: https://www.toyota-europe.com/world-of-toyota/Toyota-bZ
Well if your company is behind the ball on EV tech and the government of the largest economy in the world is handing out subsidies for EVs you have two choices.
1. Try to catch up fast as possible. Buy an innovative company, increase R&D budget, etc.
2. Lobby away your competitors subsidies to buy yourself more time to catch up.
So I could spend **billions** to buy a firm with better EV technology. That’s very expensive.
I could increase the R&D budget substantially but this will be timely and is no guarantee of working in the shrinking time window.
Or I could spend **millions** to buy enough political capital to get this shit squashed.
Our tax dollars are mostly nothing more than casino chips for politicians and special interests.
I totally get that logic, but I think the problem is that they're up against the companies that made a similar bet on EVs. I see it more as a stalling tactic so they have more time to catch up to competition.
You are exactly correct. If Toyota can stall any legislation that helps the EV market in order to give them enough time to compete it's a massive win at such a low cost compared to their other options.
Of course once Toyota has their shit together and has some competitive EV's to roll out you can bet they will then be on the other side of this legislation.
An electric 4Runner would be so nice. I love mine right now and would definitely get an electric down the road.
Yeah. I love the Model Y, Model X, Cybertruck, and even the new electric F-150 and Rivian, but an all-electric 4Runner would be perfect. 4x4 with clearance. The storage and being able to sleep in the back.
That’s pretty much what the Rivian R1S is
Absolutely, and it's why I have my eyes on it.
It's just hard to beat the reliability of a Toyota so winning over Toyota loyalists is going to take some time. I have a hard time imagining owners of a Toyota truck (Tacoma, 4Runner, Tundra, Sequoia, Land Cruiser) are willing to buy a Rivian until Rivian has a proven track record.
That said, everything I've seen from the Rivian trucks looks amazing and I'm super happy it exists.
For the low price of 75k for a base 🥲 Toyotas are worth their weight in gold these days
If I sold mine right now I would actually turn a profit and it’s a year and a half old. It’s taking everything in me not to do it.
My 2017 Tacoma would easily sell for 10k more than I bought it new for in 2017. Car market is absolutely crazy right now. Too bad it'd be equally bad to buy one
I sold a 2005 4runner for 9k less than 5 hours after posting it
They bet hard on the Mirai technology, yet they are still bringing EVs to market. Plus they have helped Tesla as well. I think they were too indecisive on what the future of auto tech would be, and EVs took hold faster than they anticipated.
"wrong horse" might be also a wrong statement depending how the future will turn out. What if Toyota is right but it's just way too soon and the tech isn't there yet? Electric cars might turn bad to the environment in the long run if batteries won't be properly recycled. Competition is good, it's good that someone is working on an alternative.
>The gap between scientific recommendations on climate change and government policy action is reiterated with increasing urgency by organizations including the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and Environmental Programme (UNEP), as well as the International Energy Agency (IEA). In August 2021, the IPCC published the first installment of its Sixth Assessment Report underscoring the world’s trajectory toward warming greater than 1.5°C and issuing a ‘code red’ warning. Despite this, September 2021 analysis from the global consortium of scientists behind the Climate Action Tracker tool found that not a single major, global economy has put in climate policy frameworks that are consistent with the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C warming limit. Likewise, the United Nations Environmental Programme’s 2021 Emissions Gap Report finds that, when combined, national climate policy plans globally are only on track to limit global temperature rise to 2.7°C by the end of the century. Corporate and industry association policy engagement is key to understanding this lack of progress.
>InfluenceMap’s analysis has shown that vested corporate interests, largely representing the fossil fuel value chain sectors, have fought to preserve business as usual policy frameworks via intensive and highly nuanced policy engagement activities, while also using extensive PR and advertising materials to ‘greenwash’ their real climate agendas. This has stymied global climate action, while voluntary disclosure frameworks have left stakeholders largely in the dark about which companies are responsible.
List of worst Companies in regard to policy engagement:
Company, Sector, HQ Country, Engagement Score
1 [ExxonMobil](https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/About-us/Who-we-are/Corporate-governance/ExxonMobil-board-of-directors), Energy, United States, -66
2[Chevron](https://www.chevron.com/about/leadership#boardofdirectors), Energy, United States, -65
3 [Toyota Motor](https://global.toyota/en/company/profile/executives/), Automotive, Japan, -53
4 [Southern Company](https://investor.southerncompany.com/corporate-governance/board-of-directors/default.aspx), Utilities, United States, -51
5 [Sempra Energy](https://www.sempra.com/investors/governance/board-of-directors), Utilities, United States, -45
6 [BASF](https://www.basf.com/us/en/who-we-are/organization/management/board-of-executive-directors.html), Chemicals, Germany, -39
7 [ConocoPhillips](https://www.conocophillips.com/investor-relations/corporate-governance/board-of-directors/board-members/), Energy, United States, -36
8 [Glencore International](https://www.glencore.com/who-we-are/our-leadership), Materials, Switzerland, -32
9 [BP](https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/who-we-are/board-and-executive-management/the-board.html), Energy, United Kingdom, -27
10 [OMV](https://www.omv.com/en/about-us/executive-board), Energy, Austria, -25
11 [American Electric Power](https://www.wsj.com/market-data/quotes/AEP/company-people), Utilities, United States, -24
12 [Phillips 66](https://investor.phillips66.com/corporate-governance/default.aspx#section=board), Energy, United States, -24
13 [Valero Energy](https://www.valero.com/about/board-directors), Energy, United States, -24
14 [Rio Tinto Group](https://www.riotinto.com/en/about/board-of-directors), Materials, United Kingdom, -24
15[Duke Energy](https://www.duke-energy.com/Our-Company/Investors/Corporate-Governance/Board/Board-of-Directors), Utilities, United States, -24
16 [Berkshire Hathaway](https://www.wsj.com/market-data/quotes/BRKB/company-people), Industrials, United States, -23
17 [Gazprom](https://www.gazprom.com/about/management/directors/), Energy, Russia, -22
18 [BMW Group](https://www.bmwgroup.com/en/company/leadership-and-governance.html), Automotive, Germany, -22
19 [BHP](https://www.bhp.com/sustainability/communities/bhp-foundation/board-governance), Materials, Australia, -21
20 [Air France-KLM](https://www.airfranceklm.com/en/board-directors), Airlines, France, -21
21 [Enbridge](https://www.enbridge.com/about-us/executive-leadership/board-of-directors), Energy, Canada, -20
22 [Occidental Petroleum](https://www.oxy.com/investors/Governance/Board-of-Directors/Pages/default.aspx), Energy, United States, -19
23 [TC Energy](https://www.tcenergy.com/about/governance/), Energy, Canada, -19
24 [Daimler](https://www.daimler.com/company/corporate-governance/board-of-management/), Automotive, Germany, -19
25 [Hyundai Motor](https://www.hyundai.com/worldwide/en/company/ir/corporate-information/bod/board-of-directors), Automotive, South Korea, -18
These are the companies talking to people in power, attempting to keep them from moving forward on changes that would help ensure a more habitable world. Lest we think that it stops there, I've linked the board of directors for each of these companies. Those are the **individual people** who have oversight of their companies. They are the ones who allow their companies to continue to greenwash with their public commitments while privately pushing your leaders to slow down on saving the planet.
Fucking lmao. To think toyota is one of the worst offenders while dodge isn't even on the list. Don't get me wrong. I like both dodge and Toyota. But I find it hillarious, that the company known for the prius is a worse company that manufactures hellcat minivans.
Dodge is a small part of a larger company. And Dodge isn't trying to convince politicians to avoid transitioning to EVs.
Interesting they arbitrarily single out the only Japanese company in the list, when there are like twenty American companies here
Hmm I don't think it's that, so much as that Toyata is the biggest company on the list that isn't oil. Everyone knows fossil fuels are shit for the environment and everyone knows ExxonMobil has a vested interest in keeping oil profitable - Toyota on the other hand is a massive car brand which has a reputation for making more compact and environmental cars, such as the Prius, so their inclusion as the third worst company in the list is notable.
Most of the rest are all mining, energy, and utilities companies aka the usual suspects. Toyota being near the top is genuinely newsworthy given their green Prius/Hybrid image
It's not arbitrary. Toyota is the the best selling car manufacturer in the US. And they have. A reputation for hybrids, which may make them seem climate-friendly. The US based companies listed are all energy/utility companies. Berkshire might be surprising, but they're not a consumer brand.
I mean what do you expect from energy companies. they are literally providing a service for the world who demands energy and aside from fossil fuels there is no a great alternative for many things.
Very inciteful, any cars that are recommended?
edit: insightful. I was tired, but that's too funny to fix.
Agreed, or maybe Volvo for "luxury."
Any plug in fully electric car with battery big enough to last your typical commute.
The annoying part about these is the cost and inability to use a tax credit to it's full extent if you don't make enough. We poors need to be able to afford these cars as well.
1st Gen Nissan Leaf my dude. Dirt cheap and probably enough range for your commute
Just checked the price of a Nissan Leaf and here in Australia a new one from Nissan costs $53,000....
Going electric in Aus feels so out of reach because they come under the "luxury car tax" which was implemented to keep the car manufacturing industry here alive. Despite car manufacturing being gone for what feels like a decade now, we still have this dumb tax and no EV subsidies
> Very inciteful
You may mean insightful unless you're proposing we eat the rich here and now?
Depends on your budget/needs really, and what country you're in. As an American watching what's been coming out over here for the last couple years there's of course Tesla but they're a known quantity at this point. For the next examples, I'm going to focus on what I consider to be purpose built EVs - I'm going to ignore the low range 'compliance cars' like the Focus electric and the mini cooper electric since the short range they have makes them questionable in terms of utility outside of being in-city errand runners or short commute vehicles. The company making the biggest push right now I think would be Ford - the Mustang Mach-E is supposedly a fantastic sporty CUV, the F-150 Lighting is a very promising looking electric pickup with some pretty neat features exclusive to the EV variant of the F-150 (like the massive frunk), and the Maverick is a cheap small pickup with a hybrid option that gets excellent fuel economy. All of these are either available now or early next year. GM would probably be next - they came out with the Bolt EV a couple years back which, along with the Nissan Leaf and BMW i3, were what I consider to be the first serious non-Tesla EVs in North America. The Bolts unfortunately are all under a major recall due to fires caused by the LG-made battery packs though. GM has announced both the Hummer EV and Cadillac Lyriq will be entering production within a year as well. Hyundai and Kia have both produced crossovers - the Niro and Kona are both CUVs with EV variants that have a 200+ mile range. Stellantis (New company that contains Dodge, Fiat, Chrysler, and more) have been lagging behind but say they will have EV offerings in 2024 or so. Honda, Toyota, and Mazda don't seem to have any serious, compelling EV offerings now or in the near future unfortunately. Mazda has a MX-30 EV offering but the 100 mile range will probably doom it in the NA market. Toyota has some very good plug in hybrids (The RAV4 Prime is very well regarded) but that's about it. Honda is still eating glue in the corner trying to make fuel cells a thing, continuing to make hybrids with fairly small batteries compared to their competition, and ~~occasionally putting out a concept like the Honda E~~. EDIT: Correcting myself - apparently the Honda E launched in Eurpoe and Japan last year. Hopefully they'll figure out a way to improve it's range in the next iteration. Listed as being 220km/140 mi which is actually pretty good compared to other subcompact EVs but would probably not do well in the NA market, which is probably why they didn't launch it here.
I may have missed some vehicles - additional input is welcome, especially about non-American offerings. The short of it seems to be that American, Korean, and European manufacturers seem to be leading the way with EV development, with Japanese manufacturers lagging a ways behind - for now. I believe there have been some major advances by Chinese manufacturers as well but I have not been able to find as much detail on them unfortunately.
Hyundai is going all out on electric,
Edit: so surprised to see them at all even in top 25
It's because Hyundai is a massive chaebol. They also do mining and construction and heavy machines etc
But it's very specifically Hyundai Motor instead of Hyundai Group.
Thank you for this list
Just pulled all my stock investments out of duke and southern company
It's probably because that '95 Camry is still friggin running and the owners haven't upgrade to a hybrid yet.
Running an old car to the ground is typically better for the environment then a new car, even if the new car is more fuel efficient. Someone’s gotta dig all that metal out of the ground for a new car.
For carbon emissions, this isn’t true. It takes far less carbon to make a new car than will be reclaimed by a 10 or 20 MPG increase.
> The Japanese manufacturer has since revealed their first electric crossover, jointly developed with Subaru. It’s the first of seven fully-electric bZ vehicles expected.
To Toyota's credit, at least they are rolling out a mass-produced purely electric car in 2022.
Remains to be seen if it will actually be mass produced, or they just sell a few hundred between California and Europe.
It says we will be getting them herein NZ as well so might be full on roll out
That’s not great though. Ford has 2 already (well a car and a van) and the F150 will be out next spring. Ford. Are ahead the people who make/made the Prius. And they’re 1/3 the size of Toyota.
This does not fit the strategy of Toyota. They will wait until they have a refined product before rolling it out. This ensures longer lasting vehicles, that in another way, are significantly better for the environment, due to the fact that they can be used for a greater amount of time.
100% this is the reason toyota puts new tech out to public later than other companies. They test and test and retest so you get a quality product.
No one understands this until they own a Toyota. I'll gladly wait for Toyota to refine their EV options before jumping into it.
If they were just delaying production of their own EVs that would be acceptable. But they are actively lobbying governments to prevent legislation regarding vehicle emissions, carbon taxes, etc. Fuck Toyota. Boycotting them forever.
It's a giant Japanese company. They change at the speed of Arctic molasses when they hurry.
Toyota had the biggest investment in fuel cell vehicles out of every car compay.
They really wanted fuel cell cars to beat battery.
Oh my bad someone below me already said this.
They're also massively investing in solid state batteries, if they get those working they could pretty much leapfrog everyone else
Which car company is the best then?
Or the least obstructive?
The ones that sell the least
But I saw a Toyota ad saying we’re in this together /s
I’m hoping solid state tech revolutionizes the industry as long range fast charging, safer, battery swapping systems and more will help us move forward as fossil fuels are limited.
Good thing Toyota is massively investing in solid state batteries and has a shit ton of patents related to them
Judging by published timelines (e.g. Quantumscape) and investments being made, solid-state likely won't be a significant share of battery production until the early 2030s, and first appear in reasonable volume in ~2028.
For this decade, it looks like the heavy-lifting in terms of cost reductions and charge times will be done by Lithium-Iron-Phosphate (LFP) with increasing amounts of silicon in the anode.
This is what Tesla, CATL and BYD are pursuing, as well as Tesla making significant energy density improvements through packaging, with the 4680 and structural battery pack.
Battery swapping is a waste of batteries. You have to carry that many extra waiting for people to switch.
I just dont understand why they are framing cars as the bad guy, especially someone that makes cars that are some of the most durable and long lasting cars on the market. How many 20+ year old Hyundais or Acuras do you see? Now how many 90s "Tacomas" are still chugging along?
There's more to a car then the smog it puts out. It's also about all of the smog that goes into all of the parts and labor and transportation, the silicon and the rare earth metals, the plastics and otherwise non-renewable stuff that is part of a car. Meanwhile, green aparently doesnt mean batteries that take up rare earth metals and have to get replaced, all while most of the infostructure that exists to charge those batteries rides significantly on the back of dirty energy.
Besides, isnt the whole problem with climate change the fact that people dont carpool, that public transit isnt used enough, that people are still running old ass diesel guzzlers and massive trucks (not to mention that a gas leaf blower releases WAY more smog than cars per runhour). I cant help but feel like this article is shaming the wrong guys.
Is it because the corollas they made 25 years ago have not died yet?
Love my Toyotas most reliable cars I’ve ever owned
Audi, BMW, Mercedes, Cadillac :
"We plan to go into a fully electric lineup in the next 5-10 years"
["haha, V8 go brbrbrbr"](https://youtu.be/5aKem2isVvM?t=747)
The same company that makes Bugattis also makes Volkswagen Golfs
Car companies do more things than one.
and besides no one's driving the car in your video more than a regular car
What are we pissed off at Toyota for? They made the Prius and as far as I can tell, set this whole thing off.
Exactly. They're pretty much the reason the efficient car industry is where it is right now.
That argument right now of “It’s the corporations acting all corporation-like that is the cause of all climate change which absolves me of all responsibility.” drives me crazy.
I’ve seen people literally argue that it’s ok to simply consume (buy useless crap like 47 Apple Watch bands) because the corporations have the largest impact on the climate and the individual has only a small impact. That’s not untrue but the large corporations pollute so much because they’re making the useless crap that you’re consuming. Buy less shit -> corporations produce less -> they pollute less. I don’t get where the math is lost on these people.
Facts. Sometimes it seems like Toyota, Honda & Mazda are the only big car companies run by people who are actually competent. They make cars that do what cars are supposed to do: drive well & reliably.
A while ago I needed a beater as a daily driver and I chose a used Pontiac, it rumbled like crazy no matter how slow I went and the handling was awful, POS car broke down several times. I couldn’t take it anymore and sold it. I eventually bought a 2005 Toyota Prius and I’m still driving that little tank of a car to this day. It has 200K+ miles and it’s still running like new, no issues at all.
I fully understand now why Toyota is the best-selling car maker in the US and why Pontiac shut down.
My first car was a 2008 Tacoma. I drove that throughout college. I still have it around with 133k miles and apart from a couple of problems (DRLs melting and some rust), has only needed regular maintenance.
Not sure we're ready to put Mazda in that category quite yet, but they're definitely getting there.
To give an extremely condensed summary:
Toyota hit it big with the Prius, then sat on it for years while other brands started making fully electric vehicles. Meanwhile, Toyota (and other Japanese brands) started investing heavily in hydrogen car technology, which, shockingly, nobody was interested in with all the electric vehicles now on the market. Toyota got upsetti spaghetti that they wasted so much time and money on this when they were literally ahead of the game just a few years back with their hybrids, then instead of giving up and making their own electric vehicles, they've decided to pour tons of money into lobbying against government EV tax credits and initiatives in order to slow down the transition of electric vehicles so that they can have time to catch up.
Basically, they were in the lead, screwed up and fell behind, and are now trying to fuck everyone else over because they don't think it's fair that everyone left them in the dust.
> lobbying against government EV tax credits
Wasn't that just for them to delay passage because fuel cell option wasn't included?
This... Hydrogen fuel cell cars ARE electric cars. They're (Toyota) not anti-EV... They've went full hog on hydrogen and want their share since they fit the bill. If there's to be tax credits for Battery based EVs only, then the bill should state that.
This article is nonsense.
Pretty sure China, India and Brazilian companies weren’t included in this survey
and the #1 oil producer, Saudi ARAMCO
Idc anymore....imma 2J the world after its done!
Ok but lets focus on ExxonMobil and Chevron please. I genuinely don't understand how there's so much discussion around climate change and we're just letting these elephants continue. How is it that barely any news reported on Republicans bending over backwards to APOLOGIZE to oil companies.
Don’t give a shit. Trash article.
Edit: this article is going by their lobbying, not by actual fuel efficiency. Toyota has one of the most fuel efficient and reliable lineups, using less gas and having fewer vehicles end up in the junkyard. They also pioneered the hybrid.
They are to hybrids what Tesla is to the EV. IDGAF if they are lobbying against the EV movement. Until the infrastructure catches up, EVs will not fully catch on and ICE/Hybrids are the best option.
For all the promises of wind turbines and solar panels, never hear people talking about using that to produce hydrogen. Existing combustion engines can also be made to run on hydrogen, but we don't talk about that.
Instead clearly the "green" option is to strip mine all the world's lithium ore, to produce giant batteries we lug around everywhere, giant fields of batteries that the wind turbines and solar panel charge, that we will definitely recycle when their life span ends. We couldn't figure out how to recycle plastic bottles but we will definitely be able to recycle batteries.
There's also simply not enough lithium reserves for this battery utopia. There is an "endless" abundance of producible hydrogen though. Any country can create their own hydrogen as well, while lithium will be controlled by only a handful of countries.
There are ~80 million tons of proved lithium reserves. It is an environmental disaster to mine it, but that aside, there's just not enough lithium to actually convert the planet to lithium based energy storage.
If we go head first into lithium energy storage, we're going to realize a painful lesson in only about 20 years time that it was not a viable long term solution and should have moved to hydrogen from the start.
But they made the Prius first , so haven’t they contributed quite a lot already?
Toyota has been seen with ambivalence in the last few years, because while they are a top car manufacturer in terms of safety/reliability/etc. over the decades, they have also been in the spotlight for some setbacks that have been judged harshly, despite being more transparent than other makes. Do they make more mistakes, or do others hide them "better"?
possibly because they outsell everyone
Sounds flawed to me. Making cars that run for 20+ years with utmost reliability has to be better for the environment than some of the junk other manufacturers put out.
Buying a 10 year old Toyota is more eco friendly than buying a brand new Tesla because it’ll last longer
I think people forget Toyota is all about time tested designs. They aren’t early adopters. That’s the whole point. They pride themselves on reliability, and they achieve that through slow continual progress.
I’m not sure what moron thought they’d be in the forefront on ev’s but it’s some smooth brain thinking. Of course they’re last
The whole reason people buy their cars is because of reliability.
As EV’s prove themselves Toyota will move over, and likely refine them to an insane degree. Just like they’ve done for everything.
Toyota hesitated for years to use plastics in favor of metal as historically done. Now they heavily use it, and it’s key to their cars being lighter and long lasting as rust isn’t an issue. They obsessed over plastic as a material to the point where they found the right kind for every damn part.
That’s how Toyota does things. They let the science evolve then phase it in and refine it. This is their “secret sauce”.
>I’m not sure what moron thought they’d be in the forefront on ev’s but it’s some smooth brain thinking.
Toyota essentially invented the practical hybrid market, had a self driving car demo at the Tokyo Mirai-kan like 20 years ago, was one of the core inventors of hydrogen fuel cell technology, was at the forefront of a whole suite of modern safety tech, and has innovated so many manufacturing technologies through Lexus I don't know where to start, and has been pursuing solid state batteries since before Tesla was a thing. Shoot, **Tesla's first factory was a joint partnership with Toyota,** way back when the industry thought marketable EVs were impossible and Elon Musk was a quack.
This idea that "*Toyota just refines old technology that doesn't break*" is a new thing in the history of Toyota, coming primarily from the fact that they've stagnated as a company and corporate culture and sat on their laurels until everyone else caught up and surpassed them, much like the American makes in the late 1980s.
So maybe take a step or two down from your high horse berating everyone expecting Toyota--who used to be one of the most innovative companies in the world--to do more than just the bare minimum and slapping a 15% price premium onto the list price for their name brand--not their quality, because that's been declining for the past decade, too.
Idc I love my 4 Runner.
Obviously they pissed off the wrong person/aren’t playing ball
Why are we allowing big business to set the tone for the issue of climate change?
This seems a bit extreme but idk much on the subject.
The company that brought you the Prius actually only cares about profits right now. 😂
Boycott Toyota…they are lazy and have not kept up with changing technology
Odd that Boeing and Lockheed Martin aren’t in that list. Climate has always changed, always. This is propaganda. I would put money on it being funded my an auto company based in US and build their junk in Mexico.
These articles are so dumb. Like corporations are supposed to just announce all of their wrongdoings?
This makes me want to buy a Toyota
Volkswagen though?? They're probably still lying about their cars emissions.
They were really bad