[sramanat]

I don't want to take a swing at a fortune 500 CEO... :-)
This article shouldn't have been reduced to the "EVs are overhyped" sound bite. Key things that learned (and got more doubts) -
1. Cost to convert Japan's fleet to electric - ~400 billion, or < 10% of its GDP. Is that a recurring annual cost? If it is a one time cost that can be spread over 10 years at 100 billion a year, sounds very reasonable to me.
2. Energy output and peak demand - I am still unclear on this, but he seems to say that at the current power generation capacity, the country would need to triple its output to support an all electric fleet. I guess there is tremendous research potential in smoothing the power consumption over time.
3. Energy sources being unclean - Seen in conjunction with the above, the EV apologists seem to be right for a change! There will be break even a point where if a % of new capacity were renewable and fossil fuel cars are taken off the road that offsets the unclean energy sources. What is that point? (I am over-simplifying, but the hypothesis passes the smell test.)
4. It is unclear what prevents his company to be ready for a possible 2035 mandate. Are EVs that complex? Are EV technologies behind a patent wall? I am not sure. They may not be as efficient and profitable in making EVs, but I am guessing they should be able to offer EV version of a hatchback, sedan, small & medium SUV and MUV relatively easily. Plus the current models can be sold in other markets. What gives?

[ASP_73]

Originally Posted by Cessna182

Also, Toyota invested huge amounts into hybrids and hydrogen vehicles hence this statement might be motivated by their ROI considerations.

https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Tec...for-2021-debut

Here the very Same Toyota Motor President Akio Toyoda announcing new battery technology by Toyota.

Isn't this one of a most important milestones in battery ? , 1000 Patents !

[Napalm]

Originally Posted by SKC-auto

Great points, we should have a separate thread to debunk myths and explain about EVs.

Some more points to address:
EVs are heavy hence higher tyre dust.
There is no enough Lithium.
Batteries end up in landfills.
Batteries require cobalt from Congo.
Batteries explode quite frequently.
EVs are feasible only when they can travel 1000km with 5 mins charging time.

Yes. A lot needs to be done to debunk EV tech myths.

It’s really funny when people talk about lithium-ion batteries and their reusability & disposal, as though this is some new tech that is being used for the first time only in EVs. Billions of laptops, tablets & mobile/Smart phones sold every year, all over the world, are having Lithium ion batteries since a decade, and they are being recycled in many countries including India (because it is cheaper to recycle than mining these battery component chemicals from a mines, like cobalt).

Even a 2-Wheeler EV start-up like Ather has a sophisticated BMS in their electric scooters.

Currently the amount of Li-ion batteries in consumer electronics in India(and probably many other countries) will be an order of magnitude higher than the amount of batteries used in EVs. Remember that most countries have less than 5-10% market share of EVs.

Only difference is that unlike electronics, the Li-ion batteries in EVs have longer life because all EVs have some kind of battery management system(BMS) with air or liquid cooling, which keeps the batteries at an appropriate temperature and hence increases their life.

But batteries in consumer electronics goods have no BMS, that leads to heating issues, low shelf-life & less reusability.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by sramanat

I don't want to take a swing at a fortune 500 CEO... :-)
This article shouldn't have been reduced to the "EVs are overhyped" sound bite. Key things that learned (and got more doubts) -
1. Cost to convert Japan's fleet to electric - ~400 billion, or < 10% of its GDP. Is that a recurring annual cost? If it is a one time cost that can be spread over 10 years at 100 billion a year, sounds very reasonable to me..

I am not sure what this guy is smoking?

Japan average car life is, latest figure, 8,65 years. To put it differently, within 9 years every car on the road in Japan, will be replaced. That is much better than most western countries where it tends to be in the 10-12 years. So there is not a cost associated as such, it is mostly part of what would have been a regular replacement anyway.

There is a cost associated with upgrading the electricity net and ensuring sufficient charging capacity. But for that cost there is also income. You have to pay for that electricity obviously.

Jeroen

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by Ritkon

I have to agree with Mr. Toyoda here. Electric vehicles (pure ones) are advertised as having zero emission and yet, no large scale study has yet been undertaken to verify this.
.

What large scale study is missing. There have been dozens if not hundreds of studies done on the environmental impact of EVs. For the last decade or so any research that you can find will tell you the same; no matter how you dice or slice the data the EVs comes up more environmental friendly. Taking everything and anything in consideration.

For every scientific report that shows it is not I can show you twenty reports fro. Some of the most prestigious research institutes in the world.

Denying the fact that EVs are better for the environment overall is like denying there is no such such as a Corona epidemic. All scientific evidence points in the same direction. Obviously, unfortunately, that does not mean there are no doubters.

Jeroen

[nandrive]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

.

Everybody who has ever attended a physics class would be able to tell you so, it is down to how energy is converted into kinetic energy,I.e. forward motion. If you use the engine to charge the battery you are not saving anything. The only way you are really saving fuel and energy is when you have regenerate braking and charge the battery using solar panel.

The reason why hybrid show up with such incredible fuel mileages in the test results is exactly this: the standard test is done in a way very few people if any use their car. So real live mileage is much poorer and doesn’t differ that much from a comparable ICE.

Again, politicians tend to suck at math and physics, so in many countries hybrid are taxed in a far more attractive way than regular ICE powered cars. Because they think they are more green as they have a large battery.

Jeroen

I don't know who did research on hybrids with what prejudice. The real world experience of mine paints a different story. I am averaging almost 19kpl(tank full method, mixed city and highways) in a 1.7 ton awd petrol s/cuv with 4 people on board.
Just for the reference, I was driving honda fit in bay area. I was always getting bit less than 14kpl(33 mpg), though bay area is much flatter than Sydney.

There are big lobbies involved in all these, it becomes hard to believe research when real live experiences are contrary.

[sandeepmohan]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

For those wanting to a bit of serious read up on Hybrid scam

Both those articles take a convenient approach with the focus only on emissions data. There isn't much talk or data about how much fuel is consumed over similar distances with an all ICE, PHEV or Hybrid.

Hybrids or PHEV's work best in stop and go conditions. Its not for nothing they are popular with cab operators. They are not buying them for lower emissions. I don't think they care. For them, its cheaper at the gas station as the savings are significant. Taking an example of a Prius Hybrid, at a very minimum, your range extends by almost 30% with the electric motor assisting from time to time. While it may not be all that less polluting, you can't ignore the fact that it takes less fuel to cover the same distance. Alternatively; you can buy a diesel, achieve the same range as a Petrol Hybrid and choke the air a little more. I'd pick the latter.

You don't really need a Government grant to make a PHEV or a Hybrid more attractive. 20 years of real world data is out there that proves the technology is sound and is suitable under certain driving conditions.

If you are someone who spends most of the time driving on the highway, a Plug In or Hybrid is useless. In the city cycle, it offers excellent economy, is less polluting and is accessible to most folk who want to buy one.

We are not quite there yet with EV's for reasons that are primarily around cost, charging infrastructure and range. I think we can get by with the first two problems, provided you don't head out of town too often. Range is the main limiting factor with lower priced EV's. The used market is flooded with Nissan Leaf's and the like that cost as little as a used ICE but the uptake for them isn't as much due to their limited driving range and the cost to replace the battery which can cost as much as the car itself. There is reluctance to adopt EV due to this.

Hybrids and PHEV recharge their battery as brake energy regeneration and even when you are coasting. In Wellington, New Zealand, the City and many Suburbs are located under varying terrain. You go up a hill and come down often. You could be coasting and regen for as long as 2 to 3 km. ICE is not operating. In a scenario like this, the benefit of a Hybrid adds up very quickly when it comes to range. Like I had mentioned earlier, it is common to see a range exceeding 1000km on a tankful of gas with a PHEV. There is no way you can achieve those numbers with a petrol only setup.

Where it starts to become a scam is when you use the example as the article shares of a Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV or even a Subaru Outback E Boxer. Both are giant breadboxes on wheels with the latter running an engine design that is inefficient. I don't know if there are going to be any gains at all with a Hybrid and more so if these vehicles do end up in the outback.

It is idiotic of Governments to think that PHEV's and Hybrids were the solution to reducing carbon emissions. Its probably so little that you'd barely notice it. Range is where Hybrids and PHEV's excel. Under the right application and conditions, they work really well.

[sramanat]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

I am not sure what this guy is smoking?

Japan average car life is, latest figure, 8,65 years. To put it differently, within 9 years every car on the road in Japan, will be replaced. That is much better than most western countries where it tends to be in the 10-12 years. So there is not a cost associated as such, it is mostly part of what would have been a regular replacement anyway.

Jeroen

That's what the article is unclear about. I'd have expected the WSJ reporter to elaborate on that. Is he saying that the annual spend in replacing older cars is 300 billion and it will become 700 billion if older cars are replaced by all-electric cars? Or is it a one time replacement cost?

[Zed]

Originally Posted by Lowflyer23

Name one Toyota that is remotely exciting and take my money.
(No offense meant to Toyota owners or people related or admirers alike)

The 86 GT and the 2021 Supra spring to mind. I've not driven either of these but folks that have are pretty impressed. Sure the Supra has a lot of bits from BMW but the fact that Toyota is offering a sporty option in its lineup is a testament to the fact that they recognize the need to up the excitement quotient.

[Jeroen]

A couple of additional thoughts on regenerative braking and the range of PHEV as published these days through the so called WLPT norms.

On regenerative braking: There is a lot of confusion around what it really does. The internet spews out phenomenally good numbers of efficiency of 60-70%.

I see examples where people claim that by simply lifting their foot of the accelerator and coasting to a halt, especially down hill, they recover “all energy”. Well, congratulations, you are not driving a PHEV you are driving a perpetuum Mobile. And of course, they can not exist by the very nature of our physical laws. Transfer of energy will inevitably incur some loss as heat, light, noise, etc

So if it takes the engine of your PHEV X amount of energy to drive up to a hill or to accelerate, that amount can never be recovered by coasting down and or by regenerative braking. It is is the same for an EV as well.

Tesla’s claims loses around 10-20% of the energy being captured, and then the car loses another 10-20% or so when converting that energy back into acceleration. So that suggest a 60-80% efficiency.

But the efficiency numbers are not that relevant, especially not for PHEVs.

What is relevant is the effectiveness. Basically, when you apply the brakes how much additional range do you get?

The effectiveness of regenerative braking is a measure of how much it can increase your range. Does it make your theoretical range 10% further? Or even more?

Vehicle size, or better yet, weight, is probably be the largest factor in the effectiveness of regenerative braking for the simple reason that heavier vehicles have much more momentum and kinetic energy.

These days, we see much smaller and thus lighter EVs than your typical Tesla, e.g. Fiat 500. Data suggest the effectiveness of regenerative braking is very small on these relatively “light” cars.

Tesla’s on the other hand can do quite well, with an increase (or top up if you like) of their range by 20-25% due to regenerative braking. But it all depends on the driving conditions of course.

Now lets look at some of these staggering range/fuel efficiency numbers as you will find these days according to the WLPT numbers.

In order to make sense of those we need to understand how they are measured. Here how it is done for PHEV: Each car is run, in a laboratory, through a number of pre-defined test cycles

They start up with a full battery. The cycle is repeated until the battery is empty. The combustion engine operates for a longer time each cycle. Emissions are measured with each cycle. This is followed by a measurement with an empty battery in which the drive energy originates solely from the combustion engine and regenerative braking. This multi-stage measurement can not only be used to determine fuel consumption and CO2 emissions more precisely, but the electrical range and total range as well. The CO2 value to be determined is then calculated as the ratio of the electrical range to the total range

Source:

https://www.vda.de/en/topics/environ...-measured.html

What you can see is that this way of testing is very unlikely to be replicated by most actual drivers. But it is what I have been saying all along. To get the most out of PHEV you need to run the car on battery alone, and charge it at home! Running it in a combined mode, minimises the expected savings in fuel efficiency and reduced emissions.

This is exactly why PHEV are now on their way out. It looks good on papers, but in practice it just doesn’t deliver what was advertised. Our Ford Focus can deliver close to 20 km / l if I drive it carefully. Don’t need all this complicated PHEV stuff.

Jeroen

[coolmel]

Originally Posted by GrammarNazi

A company that profiteers selling crazily over-priced cars with old school tech even to people in under-developed & developing countries, is talking about cars becoming too expensive for common people! Irony died a thousand deaths when he made that statement.

Toyoda invested R&D into Hybrid tech thinking it was the next logical step, but I doubt it's going to pay off. I believe the shift to electricity is a lot more of a geo-political decision to reduce interdependence, than a naïve one based on carbon emissions and the environmental impact. The situation among sovereign nations cannot concerns itself for helping some Corporation earn profits!

Toyota isn't an NGO involved in promoting public mobility, it's a profit hungry corporation that only cares for itself. No way should common people (even non-electric enthusiasts) find themselves as an ally to such corporations, instead of what is in the strategic interest of their country.

Let's see.

I second you and just my 2 cents...their arrogance is why they were never able to become successful in our market!

[Lowflyer23]

Originally Posted by Zed

The 86 GT and the 2021 Supra spring to mind. I've not driven either of these but folks that have are pretty impressed. Sure the Supra has a lot of bits from BMW but the fact that Toyota is offering a sporty option in its lineup is a testament to the fact that they recognize the need to up the excitement quotient.

I apologize to everyone for putting up an off topic post up here and yes I agree that the 86 GT is a good fun car but IMO simply taking everything from BMW and branding it as a Supra doesn't make Toyota an enthusiast's brand and barely one or two performance cars doesn't mean that they "recognize the need to up the excitement quotient".

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

On regenerative braking: There is a lot of confusion around what it really does. The internet spews out phenomenally good numbers of efficiency of 60-70%.

I see examples where people claim that by simply lifting their foot of the accelerator and coasting to a halt, especially down hill, they recover “all energy”. Well, congratulations, you are not driving a PHEV you are driving a perpetuum Mobile.

Well, I had the privilege of asking some of these questions to Satoshi Ogiso face to face, he used to be the head of all Hybrid car development back in 2013.

Originally Posted by Samurai

Q: How much of Kinetic energy is converted to electric power, and how much is wasted as heat energy in the conventional brakes?
A: If you are just taking your leg off the accelerator or braking gently, the entire braking is provided by the generator. In that case, we convert 80% of the kinetic energy to electric power. However, if the conventional brakes kick in due to hard braking, the conversion can be as low as 50%.

Q: A conventional lead acid battery has an efficiency of 75%. What is the efficiency of a hybrid battery?
A: It is very high, up to 98%. This was stunning, I didn’t expect such a high value.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Well, I had the privilege of asking some of these questions to Satoshi Ogiso face to face, he used to be the head of all Hybrid car development back in 2013.

Remarkable to say the least! In 2013 he claims Toyata's are more efficient in regenerative braking than a current 2020 Tesla!!

This is the thing about asking questions; make sure you know your stuff so can you follow up with actual data and insight to counter bullshit. You should have challenged him quoting other data points, other research that at the time was showing very different figures. Even todays’ actual figures are different than what he was claiming 7 years ago.

Missed opportunity and another bit of fake news as far as I am concerned.


Jeroen

[SSO]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

I am not sure what this guy is smoking?

Japan average car life is, latest figure, 8,65 years. To put it differently, within 9 years every car on the road in Japan, will be replaced. That is much better than most western countries where it tends to be in the 10-12 years. So there is not a cost associated as such, it is mostly part of what would have been a regular replacement anyway.

There is a cost associated with upgrading the electricity net and ensuring sufficient charging capacity. But for that cost there is also income. You have to pay for that electricity obviously.

Jeroen

Average age of cars on the road is 8 years in the UK and 12 in the US. Most of the rest of Europe is in the 8-10 range.