Toyota CEO Claims EVs Worsen co2-emissions, Pushes Back on Proposed ICE Bans
- Thread starter wemay
- Start date
AutoMechanic
Site Donor 2024
Maybe if your Beetle was like this you'd like 'em better.
That is so disappointing with the Tesla kit in it
a disgrace to the Beetle community.I want to see a Tercel or a old school Camry with a Prius drivetrain. It’ll go faster and not be as ugly as a Ugg boot.
Deciding from seat time, or some other reason?
Mr. Toyoda is right. I personally prefer hybrids. Toyota makes a good one. Plus they are developing solid state technology.
I have a friend who wants us to be at net zero emissions right now and thinks he his with his Tesla. Indiana gets most of its electricity from coal. I have no idea what the mining of the battery components entails, but I doubt they are doing the work with solar powered earth movers.
I have nothing against EV’s although I do want to know the cost per mile. A 300 mile weekly commute in a 35 mpg car costs just over $20 if gas is $2.50 a gallon. What would that weekly bill turn into with an EV? How much worse would it be if you wanted heat or AC?
I have nothing against EV’s although I do want to know the cost per mile. A 300 mile weekly commute in a 35 mpg car costs just over $20 if gas is $2.50 a gallon. What would that weekly bill turn into with an EV? How much worse would it be if you wanted heat or AC?
AutoMechanic
Site Donor 2024
Just because cars were never meant to be electric and nothing worse than a boring car.
I can only give the "Jet Plane" comparison. In our Gulfstream G550, the engines cannot be heard from the cockpit, but oh-man is that thing fun. It's like the "hand of god" pushing you along.
A quality EV is much the same way, that amazing power, right now. Plenty fun too!
AutoMechanic, I started a thread about batteries and it was deleted. In that thread I was able to show there is absolutely no question that EV's don't go as far on a gallon of fuel (burned in the power plant) as a hybrid/economy car goes on a gallon in the tank.
Put another way, Natural Gas, Coal, Fuel Oil and Biomass all can be burned to produce electricity. Doing so provides fewer miles in an EV than if equivalent BTU of fuel is used in a Hybrid.
As an energy saving measure, EV's waste energy when powered by fuel burning power plants.
Of course, if you directly charge your EV with Solar or your local power is Hydro or nuke, the equation changes markedly.
But it's good to note that today's solar panels don't save power plant fuel either...... As inefficient peaker plants must crank up when the sun does not shine.
Last edited:
4WD
$50 site donor 2024
I don't know about that one! My coworker has two EVs and the Hyundai is pretty fun to drive. But that Tesla is just nuts! I would get so addicted to the acceleration on that I'd be in jail.
To help cut to the chase on the question: "Does an EV pollute more than gasoline?" - the short answer is no. Here's the snapshot graph of the U.S. average grid make-up, which puts EVs and PHEVs in the lead for emissions:
These calculations come from a handy tool over at the U.S. Dept. of Energy, which you can further refine by state-level grid makeup: https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions.html
And to answer your follow-up question, EVs also lead gasoline for emissions in all states - even a coal heavy-state like WV:
And to the third question you mind: "What about production emissions?" While EVs do have a higher manfuacturing emission vs. gasoline - somewhere around 15-30% by best estimations - those increased emissions are made up for over the life of the vehicle, still putting EVs on top: https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/cleaner-cars-cradle-grave#ucs-report-downloads
And even before gas, ethanol was an early fuel option.
These calculations come from a handy tool over at the U.S. Dept. of Energy, which you can further refine by state-level grid makeup: https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions.html
And to answer your follow-up question, EVs also lead gasoline for emissions in all states - even a coal heavy-state like WV:
And to the third question you mind: "What about production emissions?" While EVs do have a higher manfuacturing emission vs. gasoline - somewhere around 15-30% by best estimations - those increased emissions are made up for over the life of the vehicle, still putting EVs on top: https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/cleaner-cars-cradle-grave#ucs-report-downloads
You know cars started on electric before running on gasoline, right?
And even before gas, ethanol was an early fuel option.
Last edited:
The current Mirai is just one step in the evolution of FCEVs. Ultimately, what Toyota is working on and trying to accomplish is directly powering fuel cells with natural gas and/or propane (which I predict we will see within a couple of years), and then eventually gasoline. When this happens, they will already have a workable FCEV platform in production. This is really the ultimate solution to BEV's shortcomings. Toyota is well along in this engineering, but it is still a few years away from commercial viability. Unfortunately, this technology doesn't totally eliminate carbon emissions, but it does greatly reduce them.
Last edited:
I enjoyed that thread, didnt know it got deleted.
It meanwhile reappeared, easy to see that nothing like that has ever been shown ;-)
The EV battery discussion thread (bogus breakthroughs)
This thread is about batteries, not the virtue of EV's or other EV related tech. Today's EV's are expensive, have limited range and relatively slow charging, and this is due to the battery. I've been reading about batteries for years now, and despite the frequent news reports of "battery...
bobistheoilguy.com
To that end as well, to be clear - Toyota is heavily invested in hydrogen and regular hybrid vehicles. Take it as no surprise they have been poo pooing a competing drivetrain design being prioritized by their competitors.
A few random examples of problems:
A hybrid vehicle cannot nearly recuperate like a BEV.
If it replaced an e-dumper it would still remain a hybrid, not a downhill running plant.
No inefficiency in the world of peakers explains how renewables were not saving fuels by telling peakers to stand by.
Hydro is a good partner of wind and PV etc., not the insinuated natural spouse and accomplice of nucular and nuclear pulling the chestnuts out of the fire... (there's no two new coal fired plants for every three PV sites built; being someone's parasite of France doesn't even mean you're stopping electricity export to nuclear France in german "Dunkelflaute" January 2017, etc. pp. Gas as one more natural partner likes to be a peaker for the moment...)
.
.
.
Requirements are nothing but requirements. A trafo unit here and a Nezzy there...
It's always easy to obfuscatingly work from an aspect or two and imagine something as being shown while in fact hardly anything meaningful had been touched. From silly ideas to alternatives means to get rid of false premises first. A 21st century grid connects but also replaces sites, capacities – whatever you need it to be called – in the end as it connects over continents if you only will.
For decades there will be peakers left do deal with. Dedicated peakers in all natural devotion. Nothing like the status quo.
For a few more years there will be hybrids left to refuel. Not necessarily from fossil oils if you don't like the idea of 42kWh going into just six liters of diesel well_to_tank and corresponding CO2 from that start in some remote desert.
Forever feel free to challenge BEV – but better hurry up now and go produce more efficiently, produce something very different, produce pink and less smelly, make hybrids compatible and squared with a 2026 world. Tie into some 18wheeler-infrastructure of 2031 if you need to stay somewhat behind. Whatever you like, it's your hypothetical challenge. Challenges are free.
A hybrid vehicle cannot nearly recuperate like a BEV.
If it replaced an e-dumper it would still remain a hybrid, not a downhill running plant.
No inefficiency in the world of peakers explains how renewables were not saving fuels by telling peakers to stand by.
Hydro is a good partner of wind and PV etc., not the insinuated natural spouse and accomplice of nucular and nuclear pulling the chestnuts out of the fire... (there's no two new coal fired plants for every three PV sites built; being someone's parasite of France doesn't even mean you're stopping electricity export to nuclear France in german "Dunkelflaute" January 2017, etc. pp. Gas as one more natural partner likes to be a peaker for the moment...)
.
.
.
Requirements are nothing but requirements. A trafo unit here and a Nezzy there...
It's always easy to obfuscatingly work from an aspect or two and imagine something as being shown while in fact hardly anything meaningful had been touched. From silly ideas to alternatives means to get rid of false premises first. A 21st century grid connects but also replaces sites, capacities – whatever you need it to be called – in the end as it connects over continents if you only will.
For decades there will be peakers left do deal with. Dedicated peakers in all natural devotion. Nothing like the status quo.
For a few more years there will be hybrids left to refuel. Not necessarily from fossil oils if you don't like the idea of 42kWh going into just six liters of diesel well_to_tank and corresponding CO2 from that start in some remote desert.
Forever feel free to challenge BEV – but better hurry up now and go produce more efficiently, produce something very different, produce pink and less smelly, make hybrids compatible and squared with a 2026 world. Tie into some 18wheeler-infrastructure of 2031 if you need to stay somewhat behind. Whatever you like, it's your hypothetical challenge. Challenges are free.
Last edited:
That's what mr Toyoda also asked in the above article. From coal and gas is the answer, and that means it just makes cars more expensive to build and buy, but not less poluting.
To help cut to the chase on the question: "Does an EV pollute more than gasoline?" - the short answer is no. Here's the snapshot graph of the U.S. average grid make-up, which puts EVs and PHEVs in the lead for emissions:
View attachment 37357
These calculations come from a handy tool over at the U.S. Dept. of Energy, which you can further refine by state-level grid makeup: https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions.html
And to answer your follow-up question, EVs also lead gasoline for emissions in all states - even a coal heavy-state like WV:
View attachment 37359
And to the third question you mind: "What about production emissions?" While EVs do have a higher manfuacturing emission vs. gasoline - somewhere around 15-30% by best estimations - those increased emissions are made up for over the life of the vehicle, still putting EVs on top: https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/cleaner-cars-cradle-grave#ucs-report-downloads
You know cars started on electric before running on gasoline, right?
I'm thinking the pick up trucks are skewing the results here... there's no EV pick ups yet are there? How about PHEV?
Obviously.
I peeked in out of curiosity but won't make it a regular thing because I have no interest in electric vehicles, at least perhaps until such time as Mister Fusion is available to power them.I have no objection to anyone buying electrics if that's what they want. I do however object to governments forcing the issue. If electric cars were truly superior, new car buyers would be clamoring for them and manufacturers would be voluntarily falling all over themselves to gear up for them. However most of the demand for electric vehicles is not coming from consumers, but rather is being forced by politicians, bureaucrats, and activists who have adopted the ridiculous notion that they are going to "fight" the "climate change" bogeyman and take control of the earth's climate by pushing people into electric cars. Perhaps they also believe that electric cars will also help them "fight" the tides, the precession of the earth's axis, or the phases of the moon. Hey, why not "fight" those pesky shifting tectonic plates while they're at it.
Mr. Toyoda is absolutely correct in his assessment of the mad rush to electrification. I won't be joining in. Even if government makes driving my old gas burner more expensive than buying a new electric car, I will stick with the gas burner.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Supposed to be soon, according to my sources, FCA planned the DT trucks to be able to be BEV and PHEV as part of the design.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
