Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Transportation Businesses Power United States

Toyota Is Losing the Electric Car Race, So It Pretends Hybrids Are Better 434

Ben Jervey from DeSmogBlog writes about how Toyota is "using questionable logic" to claim hybrid vehicles are superior than electric vehicles, when in reality it's only saying that because it decided years ago to invest in gasoline-electric hybrids and fuel cells in the long term instead of battery production. This decision is now coming back to haunt them. From the report: There are at least 12 car companies currently selling an all-electric vehicle in the United States, and Toyota isn't one of them. Despite admitting recently that the Tesla Model 3 alone is responsible for half of Toyota's customer defections in North America -- as Prius drivers transition to all-electric -- the company has been an outspoken laggard in the race to electrification. Now, the company is using questionable logic to attempt to justify its inaction on electrification, claiming that its limited battery capacity better serves the planet by producing gasoline-electric hybrids. For years, Toyota leadership has shunned investment in all-electric cars, laying out a more conservative strategy to "electrify" its fleet -- essentially doubling down on hybrids and plug-in hybrids -- as a bridge to a future generation of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. As Tesla, Nissan, and GM have led the technological shift to fully battery electric vehicles, Toyota has publicly bashed the prospects of all-electric fleets. (See, for instance, the swipe the company took at plug-in vehicles in this recent Toyota Corolla Hybrid commercial.)

Last week, at the Geneva Auto Show, a Toyota executive provided a curious explanation for the company's refusal to launch a single battery electric vehicle. As Car and Driver reported, Toyota claims that it is limited by battery production capacity and that "Toyota is able to produce enough batteries for 28,000 electric vehicles each year -- or for 1.5 million hybrid cars." In other words, because Toyota has neglected to invest in battery production, it can only produce enough batteries for a trivial number of all-electric vehicles. Due to this self-inflicted capacity shortage, the company is forced to choose between manufacturing 1.5 million hybrids or 28,000 electric cars. Using what Car and Driver called "fuzzy math," the company tried to justify the strategy to forgo electric vehicles (EVs) on environmental grounds. As Toyota explained it, "selling 1.5 million hybrid cars reduces carbon emissions by a third more than selling 28,000 EVs."
As for the "fuzzy math," Toyota's calculation "seems to assume that for every hybrid sold, a fully gasoline-powered car would be taken off the road," writes Jervey. "In reality, many Toyota hybrid buyers are replacing a Toyota hybrid. And, based on Toyota's own revelation that they are losing Prius drivers to Tesla, it stands to reason that many Toyota hybrid drivers would jump at the opportunity to transition to an all-electric Toyota."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Toyota Is Losing the Electric Car Race, So It Pretends Hybrids Are Better

Comments Filter:
  • Making the batteries are expensive and dirty.

    • Re:TBF (Score:5, Insightful)

      by JoshuaZ ( 1134087 ) on Thursday March 14, 2019 @08:52PM (#58275740) Homepage

      The cradle to grave environmental impact of most lithium-ion batteries is small, especially if CO2 is your primary concern. See for example https://www.researchgate.net/publication/231269141_Batteries_from_Cradle_to_Grave [researchgate.net]. See also Bingbing Li, Jianyang Li, Chris Yuan's "Life Cycle Assessment of Lithium Ion Batteries with Silicon Nanowire Anode for Electric Vehicles" (which can be found easily online but which I can't link to because the Slashdot filter is unhappy with the very long URL). That's specifically for silicon nanowire anode batteries, which is a pretty common design. The numbers for most others aren't that far off. Note also that as battery recycling and reuse becomes more common, and economies of scale ramp up further, the footprints in terms of CO2 and other pollutants will continue to decline.

      This also doesn't make much sense as an issue in the context of Toyota since a hybrid requires a pretty decent size battery also. While previous batteries were nickel-metal hydride for the Prius, the newer ones use a hefty lithium ion battery also. https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1120320_lithium-ion-vs-nickel-metal-hydride-toyota-still-likes-both-for-its-hybrids [greencarreports.com]. If one thinks that batteries are a big problem, then it isn't clear why one would think hybrid cars are a good thing.

      • by rtb61 ( 674572 )

        The greatest resource for mining and refining for new battery production old batteries. Industrial scale recycling for a dominant electric vehicle market, will make those old batteries the cheapest source of material for new batteries. The scale will be huge and put in right into the mining refining ballpark.

        Toyota took a bet, that bet being people would be more resistant to all electric vehicles and they would be able to clean up with hybrids, they were wrong. Given a choice people are switching to all el

    • Are you a paid troll? Or why do you utter that myth?

    • I know. Extracting and refining hydrocarbons are all fairies and unicorn farts in comparison to that dirty dirty Lithium lifecycle.

      Hey I like your thinking, can I interest you in joining our group? We meet with other severely brain damaged people on a weekly basis. It's a safe space where we can say stupid shit without judgement.

    • Making the batteries is.

      Try it sometime; you might even feel less stupid.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 14, 2019 @08:45PM (#58275700)

    Yes, electric vehicles appear to be the future, but hybrids do have distinct market advantages today: range, refueling infrastructure, and refuel time.

    If Toyota's competitors are zigging toward all-electric, it makes competitive sense for Toyota to zag toward an energy-efficient technology that fits better into the state of the current fueling infrastructure. In fact, doing so, Toyota can manufacture more hybrid cars and scale their battery production up when the electric infrastructure, battery storage, and refueling time issues are resolved.

    This seems like a smart business strategy to me.

    • refueling infrastructure, and refuel time.

      The problem is you're applying a gasoline paradigm to a battery vehicle. Everyone is so used to going to a gas station once a week/2 weeks that they keep thinking of this paradigm as how you "refuel" your EV.

      You refuel your EV in your garage every night. Refuel time does not matter for the vast majority of drivers, because the vast majority of drivers never drive >200mi per day, so an overnight recharge is fine.

      "But what about people without garages?!?!" They'll have to wait for battery chargers to be

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Problem is that by doing so they are missing out on developing their EV tech, getting patents on it and serving a rapidly growing market segment. In 5 years time with millions of EVs shipping and people switching in droves due to lower running/maintenance costs and performance they will be starting from scratch.

    • This seems like a smart business strategy to me.

      That's because you think you can do something at the flip of a switch. You can't. Investment in vehicle platforms has incredible cost and even bigger inertia. Pouring money into Hybrids made sense 10 years ago. Investing in them in any way now is just batshit stupid from a business perspective. Rightnow Toyota should be serious cash into all electric if they hope to at all be relevant in 5-10 years or they risk becoming irrelevant, as their own customers are currently showing them.

      but hybrids do have distinct market advantages today: range, refueling infrastructure, and refuel time.

      Advantages demanded by man

  • "I only want to do X, therefore X is the best option imaginable!"

  • by Knightman ( 142928 ) on Thursday March 14, 2019 @08:51PM (#58275724)

    I would say Toyota is right about some things but it's not what the market wants out of new vehicles today so they have to spin it anyway they can to keep up.

    Where I live hybrids are better since the distances involved getting to a major city involves some pretty advanced travel planning if you are driving an EV which means the distance can increase with up to 50% to accommodate charging stations. Plus, it gets really cold during the winter which reduces any EV to a frozen lump that can travel at best 60% of their stated range which complicates things further.

    Which also explains why everyone I know who bought an EV also has a gas guzzler or a hybrid as a second car.

    • by mentil ( 1748130 ) on Thursday March 14, 2019 @08:54PM (#58275760)

      I use an EV to tow a Prius. When the EV runs out of juice, I ditch it at the side of the road and drive the Prius the rest of the way.
      Hey, works for rockets! /s

    • by miltimj ( 605927 )
      With my EV, I get 70% in a MN winter, and that's keeping it at 70F before I ever get in. We've never run out of battery in a single day for the past 6 months. We do have a gas car, but it basically just sits there because it's much more expensive to drive and not nearly as fun.
    • I think this was true when EV's had sub 100 miles range. With EV's approaching or even exceeding 300 miles of rated range today, even if in the winter you get 200+ miles. I drive an EV with official EPA 259 mile rated range. I never charge it past 224 miles, never have any range issues. I drove it across the US in the fall with no more planning than I would have done with an ICE car, granted I picked a highway (I-90) with superchargers every 100-150 miles but I would have picked the same highway with an ICE

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 14, 2019 @08:53PM (#58275746)

    Let me count the number of all-electric cars that cost less than $30,000.00 USD new, have a range of 400+ miles, and a refuel/recharge time of 3 minutes. 0.

    When hybrids are cheap, efficient enough (40+ mpg), and for all intensive purposes (just kidding, don't freak) instantaneously refuelable, they're better than those with an lesser range, higher cost, and marginally better fuel efficiency. Not only that, there's 50 years of manufacturing knowledge behind toyota's ICE. I would trust toyota's naturally aspirated camry to run 400k miles, because it has a proven track record. Will your tesla 3 make it to 400k? Maybe, maybe not. Will it cost $15k to refresh it? Maybe, maybe not.

    I *WANT* all electrics to be the norm. I want them for their MPGe, and lack of any transmission. However, it's just too early to claim that toyota is losing because they're not going balls deep into EV's. They're probably rolling every car they have off the lot as-is.

    • have a range of 400+ miles

      Uh.....gas cars have ranges of 200-300 miles. Jacking up the requirements to make a point about EVs isn't exactly unbiased.

      Not only that, there's 50 years of manufacturing knowledge behind toyota's ICE

      And when you attach it to new technology to make it a hybrid, you lose a great deal of that benefit.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        have a range of 400+ miles

        Uh.....gas cars have ranges of 200-300 miles. Jacking up the requirements to make a point about EVs isn't exactly unbiased.

        200-300? What kind of gas cars are you driving? I'll admit to limited experience (I'm currently in an early Leaf, and before that I drove Priuses and Geo Prisms), but every car I've ever owned could go at least 350 miles on a tank of gas, and most could make it to 400+ if you weren't spending all your time stuck in stop-and-go traffic. I assume 400-500 is what the industry as a whole is aiming for; the tank sizes seem to shrink as the mileage goes up, and vice versa, so a 45-50 MPG car like the Prius gets a

        • most could make it to 400+ if you weren't spending all your time stuck in stop-and-go traffi

          And that's the key. The official range isn't based on highway driving.

          16 gallon tanks are common. 20mpg is common. That theoretical car has a range of 320 miles.

      • Um. No.

        Itâ(TM)s not the â70s or â80s anymore. My Mazda 3 (Not a hybrid. Not a Smart or iQ or even Fiat500 sized mini. Just a normal, everyday, ICE hatchback.) does better than 300 even in 100% stop-and-go hilly city driving. On an average tank, with mixed driving, I get about 375. And on a freeway road trip, itâ(TM)s good for nearly 500 to a tank. Itâ(TM)s actually the first car Iâ(TM)ve owned that routinely beats its EPA numbers.

      • Uh.....gas cars have ranges of 200-300 miles.

        My Toyota Camry is not that small of a car, and it has a range of between 350-500 miles - depending on the type of driving involved. If it's all freeway I can easily get 500 miles on one tank of gas.

        My old 93 Ford Escort GL Wagon routinely got 350 miles per gallon doing mixed driving. Even just driving it 3-4 miles at a time, from my house to where I catch the train, I'd still get 300 miles out of a tank of gas.

        Now if you start talking SUVs or trucks... then you are probably right.

      • by sjames ( 1099 )

        Even adjusting the figure down to 200 miles range, it's still a bit hard to claim the EV is a full replacement for ICE just yet. There are some EVs that can manage the range part, but they sure won't refuel in 3 minutes.

        I'm actually doing the math for myself since I would LIKE to go EV, but there are a few scenarios I may face frequently where it just won't quite cut it. If it was just occasional trips, rental would be an option, but for now it's too frequently a concern.

      • by Askmum ( 1038780 ) on Friday March 15, 2019 @05:25AM (#58277064)

        Uh.....gas cars have ranges of 200-300 miles. Jacking up the requirements to make a point about EVs isn't exactly unbiased.

        Maybe in gas-guzzling USA, not in Europe. 45 liter tank is pretty standard and a consumption of 6 l /100 km is too. That makes a range of 750 km or 465 miles. My previous diesel had 45 liter and did 4.4 l/100 km making 1000 km or 630 miles possible. Larger cars have higher consumption but also fuel tanks of 60 or 80 liter.

    • by fred911 ( 83970 )

      I have to agree, placing a wager against a company like Toyota is a fools bet. Remember how they managed the failed GM plant in Freemont, produced an excellent product and made money with the same workers? We do know what that plant is today (Telsa) don't we?

      The last naturally aspirated Camry was in 1989, past that the aspiration (fuel flow) wasn't mechanically managed. If they could only figure out how to make a strut bumper as durable as their drivelines, they'd never have maintance aside

    • have a range of 400+ miles

      Let me count the number of passenger vehicles where this is actually a legitimate requirement: 1-2%

      and a refuel/recharge time of 3 minutes

      What's a refuel time? Electric car owners want to know. I mean you actually drive somewhere to increase the range in your tank, and spend 10min doing so? How quaint.

  • by ganv ( 881057 ) on Thursday March 14, 2019 @09:01PM (#58275794)
    Toyota's approach could work if they would make a compelling plug-in hybrid. An electric vehicle isn't an upgrade over a plug-in hybrid unless its price is substantially lower (or maybe maintenance is much less.) I have been driving a Prius Plug-in since 2012 and it is a great car, but its all electric range of 12 miles is far below what is necessary to be an attractive option in 2019. The 'upgraded' Prius Prime from Toyota has 25 miles all electric range, but now the Volt has 53 miles range. If I had 60 miles electric range, I would be driving electric for about 90 percent of my driving. With no electric range anxiety because with a full tank it goes 450 miles, and with the Prius' reliability, that plug-in hybrid could be a real winner. It looks like Toyota is going to lose badly over the next decade unless they make a big change to prioritize electric range.
    • by mentil ( 1748130 )

      More likely, they'll just buy out an EV manufacturer or a battery production company. Toshiba's market cap is 1/3 of Toyota's cash on hand (~$58B), for example, if they wanted the entire company.

  • It's not that Toyota is "losing the electric car race". It's that they are betting on hydrogen but it takes more time to get right.

    Personally I still think a long term bet on hydrogen as the ultimate electric car tech makes way more sense, in terms of being able to refill a car quickly, and even home power units based on hydrogen...

    Until then they get by with hybrids, but it's not because they are losing - it's because they are Japanese and really thinking way longer term than any American company (except

    • by mentil ( 1748130 )

      I think the 'quick refueling' thing is oversold. If you don't have to stand there and watch it, most people won't care how long it takes. If you're on the road, so long as you're recharged enough in the time it takes to make a pit stop, to make it to the next one, then that's good enough.

  • by 140Mandak262Jamuna ( 970587 ) on Thursday March 14, 2019 @09:20PM (#58275864) Journal
    It is 7 years for batteries instead of 18 months for the chips. No one thought it is possible, many still dont believe it. Only Tesla believed it and bet the entire company on the trend line.

    All the "delays" and "missteps" by Tesla are basically waiting for battery price to fall enough to make its promises deliverable. Every announcement of Tesla is met with, "it is impossible". Then as years go by and when people are all berating Tesla for not keeping the promise, the battery price falls enough and suddenly its product is viable and has a positive gross margin!

    • No, all the "delays" and "missteps" by Tesla are from over promising, repeatedly training up crews to fire them and train all new crews who crunch to get production up but barely know how to install parts, using seals that can't keep out a light dew and spending a fortune to automate before learning something every car company already knew, automation is hard. But hey, they continue to have cultists willing to prepay for cars they have no idea when they'll receive to keep them afloat so whatever.
    • by doom ( 14564 )
      https://www.reddit.com/r/Enoug... [reddit.com]
      Musk fanboys are a strange breed.
  • Status symbol (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Wookie Monster ( 605020 ) on Thursday March 14, 2019 @09:23PM (#58275880)
    I think the reason why Prius owners are defecting to the Model 3 has nothing to do with EV vs. hybrid, but rather the status associated with the Model 3. The original Prius was a plain boxy car, but the sales really took off when they decided to make it completely odd looking (ugly). When this happened, hybrid owners could drive around displaying how "earth friendly" they are, and everyone would notice them.

    Nowadays every other Prius is a taxi/Uber/Lyft, and they're fairly common. Why would someone want to drive around making everyone think you're an Uber driver? The Model 3 got so much press due its delays, and now there's a sort of mystique surrounding it. People will pay attention to you again, and you can claim that you bought the car because you want to save the environment, but in reality, you care about the status symbol more than anything else.
  • The ability to drive anywhere in the USA in range of a road and gas.
    Why be limited to the set range of all-electric?
    Enjoy more of the USA using energy offered on more roads.
    Why wait years and decades for all-electric support along roads to catch up?
    Enjoy all of the USA today. Winning with energy that is ready and usable.
    • You can go east to west coast easily on a Tesla, your knowledge is old.

      Besides, the amount of people driving 1000 miles is like 1% of all car owners.

      Get a clue, go view the Tesla superchargers map.

      Oh and no need for oil changes, or break fluids or other crap.
      You get OTA updates too.

      • by AHuxley ( 892839 )
        Why should anyone have to invest so much in any one "car" brand to see the USA?
        Freedom of movement. Freedom in energy use. Freedom over distances. The freedom not to have to buy into one brand of electric car :)
        The freedom to buy more energy to do see something different anywhere in the USA.
        Thats what's sets lower cost and better quality car design apart.
        Price, quality, the ability to go on a holiday anywhere in the USA.
        Not having to only go on set "east to west coast" roads.
        Better car designs with
  • by Locutus ( 9039 ) on Thursday March 14, 2019 @10:04PM (#58275996)
    You people do realize that Toyota had a 100% electric Rav4 in the early 2000s don't you? They partnered with Panasonic and made a kick ass NiMH battery they called the Prismatic EV-95 battery and it powered the Rav4 EV. But GM had sold the majority patent rights for NiMH to the oil industry and Toyota ended up in court and not only did they have to stop selling the Rav4 EV and the EV-95 batteries, they almost lost the right to sell their hybrids because they used NiMH too. That's right, the oil company wanted to shut down their use of NiMH in vehicles. FYI, the GM EV1 got 125 miles on a charge with the NiMH batteries they used. That was before GM collected them all and destroyed them once Bush/Cheney feed the industry $$$ to smoke hydrogen.

    So I have to wonder, why is Toyota so adverse to EVs when they were once industry leaders? Does it have to do with some legal declaration they made long ago in order to be "allowed" to continue to make and sell hybrids? It's almost insane how they are staying away from EVs.

    LoB
    • they almost lost the right to sell their hybrids because they used NiMH too.

      So how is it they managed to make the Prius? The Prius used NiMH, and the first model came online in 2003, the year the electric RAV4 was discontinued. If it was for some "legal declaration", seems like they would have continued making the electric RAV4 instead of switching to a new platform.

  • I think that Toyota hasn't been able to innovate effectively for the past few years. They've been so accustomed to making bland vanilla family sedans and light pickups for so long, that they've lost the DNA they used to have for making cars that are exciting. This is why they've had to resort to using components from their competitors/partners lately....The Scion FRS/Toyota G86/Subaru BRZ uses an engine developed by Subaru....the upcoming Supra uses an engine from BMW, and the outgoing Lexus LFA used an e
    • I think you are conflating fun and innovation. They spend ~$10B a year on R&D, but they're more into robotics, AI, autonomous vehicles, and materials chemistry than 0-60.
    • by fred911 ( 83970 )

      "BRZ uses an engine developed by Subaru"

      Developed yes, but the engine was designed by Ferdinand Porsche. Who btw also designed the first hybrid in 1900.

  • by theendlessnow ( 516149 ) * on Friday March 15, 2019 @12:16AM (#58276452)
    You know, when you're at the grocery store gas station and it's taking "forever" to fill the tank.

    What hybrid and gas vehicles need is... very very slow pumping gas stations. I mean, what if it took you an hour to fill up. Suddenly, electric charging makes a lot of sense.

    So.. slow down the pumps. Create huge gas lines.

    I remember how such things changed cars forever back in the early to mid-70s.

If money can't buy happiness, I guess you'll just have to rent it.

Working...