Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Transportation Japan

Toyota Will Share 23,740 Hybrid Vehicle Patents For Free (reuters.com) 163

Posted by EditorDavid from the patent-sharing-pending dept.
An anonymous reader quotes Reuters: Japan's Toyota Motor Corp will offer free access to its hybrid-vehicle patents through 2030, it said on Wednesday, seeking to expand use of the lower-emission technology even as the global industry shifts toward fully electric cars. The pledge by one of the world's biggest automakers to share its closely guarded patents, the second time it has opened up a technology, is aimed at driving industry uptake of hybrids and fending off the challenge of all-battery electric vehicles (EVs).

Toyota said it would grant licenses on nearly 24,000 patents on technologies used in its Prius, the world's first mass-produced "green" car, and offer to supply competitors with components including motors, power converters and batteries used in its lower-emissions vehicles... Toyota's move to unlock its patents underlines its belief that hybrids are an effective alternative to all-battery EVs, given a fuel efficiency roughly double that of gasoline cars, lower cost and that they do not need charging infrastructure. Toyota vehicles account for more than 80 percent of the global hybrid vehicle market. "Toyota has realized that they made a mistake by protecting their hybrid technology for years. This prevented diffusion" said Janet Lewis, head of Asia transportation research at Macquarie Securities.

"Toyota on its own can't get key technology accepted, but if other companies use it, that offers the best chance of expansion," she added.
The article notes statistics from LMC Automotive that hybrid vehicles "account for around 3 percent of all vehicles sold globally, eclipsing the roughly 1.5 percent share of all-battery EVs."

Shigeki Terashi, Executive Vice President of Toyota, said, "we believe that now is the time for cooperation."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Toyota Will Share 23,740 Hybrid Vehicle Patents For Free More

Toyota Will Share 23,740 Hybrid Vehicle Patents For Free

Comments Filter:

  • Wow, this seems extremely generous. Perhaps a little too generous. What's the catch here?

    • Most hybrid technology is obsolete. A lot of those patents have to do with things like power switching and control and distributing torque among multiple providers on a drive train. Most of that disappears in an EV vehicle.

      So I guess someone figured pitching that IP portfolio to the wind would have greater PR benefit than trying to protect and maintain it.

      The car I drive, a Ford Escape Hybrid was succeeded in the Ford product line with an all ICE version of itself. No more Hybrid available. The ICE v

      • As long as Toyota maximizes its ICE engine efficiency, hybrids can beat EVs on overall system efficiency. In the Arctic EV will suck anyway (battery performance AND passenger heating) and hybrids have great range today.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by skids ( 119237 )

        A year or two ago I would have pointed out that depending on your driving patterns, hybrids will get much
        more than +10% on fuel in some situations, even though ICEs have improved. And I waould have
        said that a plug-in hybrid would be a good option.

        Not anymore. My Prius's head gasket was going (350k on it) so I looked around and hands down it was far
        too affordable to get a pure EV and never again have to take it in for an oil change, spark plug replacement,
        tune-up, or major ICE-related surgery... which acco

    • Wow. What will the stock holders going to say? Wow, this seems extremely generous. Perhaps a little too generous. What's the catch here?

      Perhaps the stockholders are likely to say "good job at getting marketing value out of expiring or otherwise obsolete patents"?

      The Prius launched 22 years ago. Some patents are likely older than that. Patents only last 20 years.

      Besides expiration we also have patents that have been worked around via a different approach to a problem, patents covering a now obsolete approach, etc. The "marketing value" of sharing these patents may very well be greater than "commercial value" of the patent itself.

      • Why guessing when you can do a quick check on the USPTO site?

        Here is the link to all the patents listed that 'assigned to Toyota [uspto.gov]'. There are 29,770 patents, and there are many that are granted not that long ago (10 million number). Here is another link that are specified with the word 'hybrid [uspto.gov]' in the patent title. There are 792 patents. Similarly, there are many patents that are granted not long ago too.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by drnb ( 2434720 )
          Again, patents also lose their value through non-infringing workarounds and the underlying technology (hybrids in this case, overshadowed by new EVs) loosing market appeal.

          These, and aging, have likely devalued many of their patents. Again, we are likely seeing a PR move, one that gets the greater value from these patents.

    • It's not the first time they have done this.... They released the patents for the engine the Auris is using a few years ago too. That was like... at least 10.000 patents as I remember it.

      There is a strong incentive to get everyone to use the same technology as themselves, This is an easy way to get the companies not already invested in Hybrid tech, to start a partnership with Toyota, by having them use toyota tech.... Same as when google gives you 200$ worth of free adds... for google sites.

      It's a totally v

      • This is an easy way to get the companies not already invested in Hybrid tech, to start a partnership with Toyota, by having them use toyota tech.
        I would assume that a good deal of those patents can be useful in pure EVs, too.

    • The first benefit is economies of scale. If everyone is using the same type of battery, there will be lots of producers of the batteries then need for their cars, and the cost will be lower. The second benefit is if everyone standardizes on their design, they are now the de-facto market leader. So when they come out with a new thing, everyone adopts that thing. See the item above for why this is good. PR and status. It looks good and defines them as the leader. So if you want a hybrid, do you want a To

  • Self interest (Score:3, Insightful)

    by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Sunday April 07, 2019 @12:50PM (#58398858) Homepage Journal

    They are doing this to try to prolong the production of hybrid vehicles before everyone moves over to EVs. You can see it in their advertising too, attacking EVs directly with nonsense like "self charging hybrids" (aka fossil burners, the last efficient and most polluting way to generate electricity).

    They missed the boat on EVs and now all the patents are divided up between Nissan/Renault, Hyundai/Kia and the Chinese. Europe has some too, mostly around the CCS standard that was invented because it's not CHAdeMO.

    It's actually a huge crisis in Japan. Their automotive industry is heavily invested in hybrid tech and needs to pivot hard, but mostly lacks experience and patent portfolios. Also they spent a lot of money on hybrid R&D which looks like it will only be valuable for another decade or two tops so before the bulk of sales are EV.

    • Trucks (Score:4, Interesting)

      by virtig01 ( 414328 ) on Sunday April 07, 2019 @01:20PM (#58398932)

      "Everyone" is not moving to EVs. The top 3 selling vehicles in the US are pickup trucks. Will they become EVs? Not any time soon. Hybrids? Likely.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        Many EU countries have already set a date for the end of fossil car sales. China is pushing EVs harder than anyone, and is a major market for Japanese cars. It's really only the US that is lagging a bit, but even there the writing is on the wall with electric pick-ups due in the next year or two.

        The future isn't hybrid, it's just a stop-gap and as soon as long range EVs creep into the sub $15k market fossil cars won't make economic sense for most people. Considering we have gone from a 250 mile range car co

        • "Setting a date" is an easy thing for politicians to do. The UK "set a date" for Brexit.

        • as soon as long range EVs creep into the sub $15k market fossil cars won't make economic sense for most people.

          The five year TCO of the Model 3 LR is currently about the same as a loaded Toyota Camry. Not only is that damn impressive, I'd put some real money on it coming in lower for the next 5-10 years as well, given all of the things it won't need replaced, and all the maintenance it won't need.

          While that's still in the low-to-mid $40k range, Kelly Blue Book says the average price of a new car in the US is $36k.

          We're already at the point where EVs are probably making economical sense for almost half of new car buy

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by rtb61 ( 674572 )

            You of course will not be buying another fossil fueler either. Like you, already own one, still lots of life left in it and the longer I wait the cheaper electrics will be but bugger, the much worse the resale becomes, like hopping from one bare foot to the other in hot sand, such is life ;D.

            Will my next car be an EV, absolutely, eventually I will have to start doing some trade in evaluations. See how bad the resale is on my fossil fueller compared to how low EV prices are getting, likely for the same mode

      • "Everyone" is not moving to EVs. The top 3 selling vehicles in the US are pickup trucks.

        What's the connection? Electric works just as well for pickups as anything else. Lots of electric pickups are due to come out in the next year or two [insideevs.com].

    • Re:Self interest (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Immerman ( 2627577 ) on Sunday April 07, 2019 @01:25PM (#58398952)

      I disagree. Batteries are a huge fraction of the cost of an electric vehicle, and will remain so for the foreseeable future, making them far too expensive for most people to consider. But, reduce the all-electric range from 300 miles to 30, and you can still handle 90% of most people's usage, while reducing the battery cost by 90%. Add in a small high-efficiency 30kW generator (about twice the highway cruising power consumption by an EV), and you eliminate range anxiety, charging inconvenience, etc. That makes EVs practical and affordable for far more people, while potentially reducing greenhouse gas emissions anywhere that coal provides a large fraction of grid power.

      That said, that's not how Toyota's hybrid system works,as it still relies on a horribly inefficient variable-power ICE mechanically coupled to the road for the much of its acceleration, which seems to me to largely defeat the point. Still, many of their patents may be applicable to more impressive systems.

      • The way things are going with EVs, we're seeing prices come down and range coming up, to the point where these cars become affordable and serve 99% of drivers' needs. You wouldn't get a range extender for that 1% of edge cases, in those cases you'd just rent a long range car.

        Removing weight and cost by removing batteries and reducing the range from, say, 500km to 150km, and adding a range extender might make for an interesting business case. In that case the battery range might cover only 80% of your t

        • We're not going to get gasoline cars off the streets until the price of a second-hand EV or hybrid with years of life still in it falls below a few thousand dollars. Since batteries are the limiting factor with that, that means very small batteries until such time as battery production increases at least a thousandfold, and prices fall substantially. With current battery technology, I don't think that can happen.

      • Batteries are a huge fraction of the cost of an electric vehicle, and will remain so for the foreseeable future, making them far too expensive for most people to consider.

        Not true. Even the pessimists expect EVs to reach price parity in about 5-7 years, and some industry executives expect it to happen much sooner [cleantechnica.com]. And that's just the upfront cost. Take into account the lower fuel and maintenance costs for EVs, as well as government incentives, and we already passed the point several years ago where EVs have a lower total cost of ownership [arstechnica.com] in some places.

        • Two problems with that - battery production can't begin to supply all the batteries needed to let everyone buy EV vehicles instead of gas. Doesn't matter what the price is if you can't meet market demand - and the expected result is that the price will remain high.

          And then there's the second-hand market. A large percentage of the population can't afford more than $1000 or so for a car. Add in the cost of replacing an old worn-out high-capacity battery... it's going to be really hard getting anywhere near

          • We'll find out soon enough who's right. Let's check back in five years and compare notes. Here are my predictions.

            Battery prices will have continued to fall rapidly. Battery cells will be at or below the $100/kWh level (adjusted for inflation of course).

            Worldwide EV sales will have continued to grow rapidly. At least 3x as many EVs will be sold in 2023 as in 2018, probably a lot more.

            Sales of EVs will have surpassed sales of hybrids.

            Post your own predictions, then put a note in your calendar to post aga

            • The overwhelming problem is that the automobile market is dominated by used cars - and batteries wear out. Even if the price falls to $100/kWh, you're talking $8500 to replace the batteries on a $1000 used car.

              • The estimated lifespans for modern EV batteries can be as high as 1 million miles. See the second table under https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]. Most EV batteries will outlast the cars they're in. And where are you getting that $1000 figure from? The average sales price of a used car is about $20,000 [usatoday.com].

                • I had not realized the lifespan had improved so drastically over the last decade - assuming of course that time proves the estimates valid. I'm dubious, considering the reduction in range that many people have reported with current EVs after only a few years. Notably missing from your cited table is any reference to how large a capacity reduction is considered "still viable" by those estimates. A 50% reduction in something that has only a moderately good range to begin with makes it a far less attracti

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jonwil ( 467024 )

        Why aren't we seeing more plug-in series hybrids in the style of the Chevrolet Volt? Just build an EV with a smaller battery pack and stick a small ICE powered generator under the hood to charge it when the battery runs out (have no connections between the ICE and the wheels and have the ICE and generator paired so the ICE will run at peak efficiency and use the least fuel possible)

        • Because that's two complicated systems to have issues with, and two inefficient systems because they are both small. Efficiency generally scales with size. Burning gas in a small engine to power a generator is about the least efficient way to generate power. I wouldn't be surprised if a coal power plant is more efficient.

          On top of that, the efficiency of such a system is so low that the engine can't make sufficient electricity to run the motors. This means that the engine also needs to have a transmission a

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by ukoda ( 537183 )
          Yes, that is how hybrids should have been done from day one and is the proper way to do a hybrid. Not the over engineered under performing mess that most hybrids are.

          The irony is with batteries halving in price every decade the use case for hybrids, even done properly the way you suggest, is rapidly disappearing. They would have merit in the market today but in 5 to 10 years they will be meh! and in 10 to 20 years they will be WTF?

        • How about not everyone owns a single home? Where would you be able to charge your plug-in when you are living in a condo or townhouse? Especially when your parking is an assigned spot because you do not own it? Please don't tell me that you can wired the power down from your unit which is a couple stories up. The plug-in system is not for everyone, so it shouldn't be forced to be standard.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        At the rate battery prices are falling that won't be true for much longer. It will quickly get to the point where having a complex combustion engine and drivetrain is more expensive to build and maintain, let alone an even more complex hybrid one.

        To give an example the Leaf originally came out in 2010 with a 24kWh battery. Now they are releasing the 62kWh model, so more than 2.5x as much range, and it's about the same price accounting for inflation. Nissan are actually not doing so well on the battery manuf

      • Batteries could beat ICE cars in F segment, ultra high luxury back in 2012.

        It took E segment in 2014-2015 time frame. Just luxury level

        It is cost effective in TCO metric already for the D segment, 40K - 50 K.

        It is on the verge of taking over C segment 25K to 35K. You can expect the bottom to fall out of the ICE car market. Leading to all sorts of non linear effects.

        https://cleantechnica.com/2019... [cleantechnica.com]

      • For the last 20 years, I was wondering if any car manufacturers would start using turbine generators to supplant a small battery. Turbines are terribly inefficient under variable load, but are among the best engines at full load. They're also compact enough so they could be optional, given we already live in a culture where cars are designed to accept multiple engine options. With the proliferation of turbos everywhere, I can't imagine that turbine generators would be anywhere near as expensive as they w

      • I disagree. Batteries are a huge fraction of the cost of an electric vehicle, and will remain so for the foreseeable future, making them far too expensive for most people to consider.
        Yeah, but hardly as expensive as all the fuel you would burn otherwise.

        • True, at least assuming we can keep the cost of electricity down as demand skyrockets. But that only matters to people who can afford the up-front cost of an EV. And if we're talking the extreme second-hand market, which dominates the vehicle market for the lower classes, that means an EV with a viable range has to be available for a few thousand dollars. If batteries didn't wear out, or could be replaced cheaply, that wouldn't be an issue. That's not the current reality though.

    • They missed the boat on EVs

      That's not really true though, what is happening is that the boat they are on, is hydrogen fuel cells for EV.

      That is taking a long time to come to fruition, so I agree they want to see people using hybrid vehicles for a while yet to prolong the time until the market switches to full EV - so they can get more hydrogen station in place.

      If that transition works they will actually be in better shape as hydrogen cell EV's in use are a lot more like cars people are used to. You can fil

      • Re:That's not quite right (Score:4, Informative)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Sunday April 07, 2019 @02:13PM (#58399116) Homepage Journal

        Hydrogen cars will never be mass market. They need a huge amount of infrastructure putting in, the fuel is still expensive and difficult to produce cleanly, and they aren't as convenient or cheap to run as EVs.

        • Corrections (Score:2, Insightful)

          by SuperKendall ( 25149 )

          Hydrogen cars will never be mass market.

          They will eventually far overtake traditional battery cars.

          They need a huge amount of infrastructure putting in

          Incorrect because you can easily convert gas stations, and "recharge" time is minutes like gas today.

          VASTLY more difficult is putting in the infrastructure required to support ALL cars being electric. Tesla superchargers work today only because Teslas are somewhat rare compared to other cars. But there are already reports of them getting full. you may have

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

            You don't need that many superchargers. Most charging will be at home or at work on AC.

            • So we just shift the cost of the brand new infrastructure to homes and businesses, then. Rather than utilizing the existing infrastructure that is geared around supporting vehicles (gas stations).

              • You seem to live close to the gas station, and don't mind the smell and the traffic? And you have no trouble to adjust your drive paths according to your gas level?

                • I live about 3 blocks from one... In the US the vast majority of roads are NOT major roads, they do not have stores and stations on them, unlike most of urban Europe. And I don't have to adjust my route based upon gas level, as there are literally over 160,000 gas stations in the US. There's one everywhere. Unlike charging stations (which do not exist at my office, and only at a couple places in my town).

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

                The cost is just adding a socket. It's pretty minimal and quickly pays for itself.

                • No, it's quite a bit more than that. It's a 220V, 50A (or higher) circuit. Talk to an electrician - it's going to run $500+, minimum. And that is if you have the service for it. You want a 20 kW charging system? Hope you have a 200A service - and that it's less than 50% used. Because 20 kW means 100A @ 220V. So you may have to double the panel (and mains) to your home. And everyone's home. For typically $5,000 or more. That's much more than just a socket.

                  Oh, and you and your neighbors need that to

                  • Re: (Score:2)

                    by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

                    You can charge from 110V, no problem. But yeah, 220V and higher current is nice. I had 240V/32A at home. 50A is excessive, most cars can only pull 32A anyway.

                    $500 sounds about right for a nice one. Of course companies will get them installed anyway for their own fleet vehicles, and over time the costs will continue to fall and all new buildings will have them.

                    It's not like upgrading gas stations is free either. How much do you think a hydrogen pump and storage system costs?

                    • You completely blew off anyone with a 100A service. And ignored the cost of final distribution transformer limitations for small groups of homes. And wiring up hundreds or thousands of parking spots. Because you cannot admit you didn't think about the impact of taking something that is expensive and rare and beyond what existing infrastructure was designed to support at a big level - and then calculate what it costs to grow it to that big level.

                      Go ahead, think about the cost of doubling the power capac

                    • Re: (Score:2)

                      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

                      Have you looked at places like Norway? They seem to be installing that infrastructure without too much hassle. Car parks with charge points in every bay, a bit of smarts to limit the max simultaneous current.

                      Part of the secret is that a lot of charging happens at night, when utilization is otherwise very low.

                      Still, I suppose we should feel sorry for those electricity companies faced with having to upgrade their networks just so they can deliver more of their product. Take all that business away from gas sta

                    • Norway has the population of the greater Miami, FL area. It also has massive electricity production thanks to hydro. The US does not. Guess what - solutions for one country don't often translate to another.

                      As far as charging at night - you and your neighbors are all charging at night. Demand at night just eclipsed that during the day. Oops. And do you REALLY want to have 300A potential draw off of your 200A breaker panel and distribution transformer? On the hope that it won't all be used at the same

                    • Re: (Score:2)

                      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

                      So basically the problem is a sub-standard power grid and CEOs who can't see beyond next quarter.

                      If I were king I'd make sure the consumers didn't pay for it, that's for sure.

                    • When Manhattan was laid out (in the mid 1800s), I don't think the foresaw millions of people in vehicles, do you? Should they just wipe out 70% of the buildings so they can widen the roads? Likewise the electric grid - when it was installed, 20 kW per home was an outrageous amount of power, given refrigerators were still pretty new, TV was in its infancy, and there weren't microwaves, hair dryers, computers, etc. A solid 2 kW was a massive amount for a home - 10 lightbulbs and a fridge simultaneously was

                    • Re: (Score:2)

                      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

                      In the UK we had to save copper by, for example, using ring main in homes. It's not like we went nuts installing extra capacity for the sake of it.

                      It's a solvable problem, that's the point. Everywhere has challenges, e.g. in the UK we need massive on-street infrastructure projects. Sound countries have started putting that in already. Upgrades were required, of course. But when you consider the long term, i.e. beyond next year's bonus, it's obvious that getting to be the vendor people rely on to run their c

                    • It's a solvable problem, that's the point.

                      It's a problem that doesn't even have to exist. That's the point. Hydrogen fuel cells eliminate this problem altogether, and solve many others (such as range issues, need for chargers all over, etc). Rewiring your home, adding chargers outside for people who do not have garages, etc. all go away with fuel cells. A 5 minute stop at a filling station any time you need/want it is simple. And you don't have to completely rebuild the infrastructure in your nation.

                    • Re: (Score:2)

                      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

                      For all the problems they solve they create new ones, particularly the problem of mass producing hydrogen in a clean and sustainable way. Plus the cars themselves are much more mechanically complex.

                      Look at LPG. Hardly anyone has it, despite it costing half what petrol does and it being fairly easy to convert existing cars to it. Alternative fuels have been tried and they failed.

                    • LPG has less than half the energy density of gasoline, so you don't really gain any cost benefits. Sure, the fuel is half price, but you need twice as much. Hydrogen can be produced if you have electricity and water - both of which are readily available.

                      So why do you want to force a complete reworking of the entire electrical grid? Why you fascination with spending trillions and forcing people to spend thousands and thousands for something that is not needed?

                    • Re: (Score:2)

                      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

                      You only need about 20% more autogas to go a given distance, not double. The energy density is around 50-60% that of petrol, but it's converted more efficiently into motion.

                      If you think the cost of supporting EVs on the electrical grid is trillions (presumably of dollars) you have no idea. Anyway it doesn't matter what you think, it will happen any the grid will have to cope with it, like it or not.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by ukoda ( 537183 )
                Yep, just like we shifted from going the video rental store to streaming at home. When I had an EV I smiled every trip home when I passed the gas station realising I would never need to waste time in that queue again.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Socguy ( 933973 )
            Well SK, you may as well run out and buy your Fuel Cell car then. Over the past 10 years auto companies have managed to get a whopping 4800 of them on to the road, (though limited California for some reason.) I mean Tesla is selling that many M3s in a month but they're sure to go bankrupt any time now and I'm sure that nobody else is foolish enough to follow Tesla down that dead end road.

            If you're looking for suggestions, the most popular is the Toyota Mirai. It's got a blazing fast 0-60 time of 9.4

          • They will eventually far overtake traditional battery cars.

            Based on what? The SuperKendall decree?

            Incorrect because you can easily convert gas stations, and "recharge" time is minutes like gas today.

            No you can't. Safe handling of hydrogen is orders of magnitude different from petrol stations. It would be easier to build entirely new stations than attempt to convert petrol stations for this purpose.

            VASTLY more difficult is putting in the infrastructure required to support ALL cars being electric.

            What infrastructure? My electric car has never been attached to any infrastructure that isn't available at every single house in the country.

            That is why the future is inevitably hydrogen

            Because you don't understand infrastructure, EVs, or Hydrogen as demonstrated? Not a good argument man, not a good argument at all

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by ukoda ( 537183 )
            How about we come back in 10 years and read you words. Hydrogen was just a stupid distraction to hold off investment in real EVs. Unfortunately that horse has now bolted, why would people piss around with a complicated hydrogen solution when there is a simple solution that works well and is available now?
        • Hydrogen is a scam run by the oil companies. It's their ace in the hole. Most hydrogen is derived from fossil fuels, natural gas reforming.
    • Actually, it wasn't so much hybrids that Toyota bet on, but hydrogen fuel cells. They're a super good idea, maybe better than batteries, but it looks like batteries have the inertia.

  • It is really amazing how much time and money the old automakers are willing to spend to try to interfere with Tesla's success. They should stop screwing around and focus on EVs. The American automakers are even worse - we should not have saved them during the financial crisis. Let natural selection do it's job.

  • Nothing wrong with the current system when you have almost 24,000 patents on a car?

    Do they have a patent on their patent generation system?

    • Patents are country-specific; a single patentable idea can become 150-ish patents for world-wide coverage. This number could represent as few as 160 unique patentable ideas.

  • .....one day. No range issues. No worries about finding plugs or any need to even consider charge levels. No concerns about -35C affecting battery performance in the winter.

    About zero percent chance I would buy an EV anytime soon, but hey if you like them have at it. Variety is good.

    Still fully expect my next car to be a shiny new ICE powered one regardless. Not much for performance oriented hybrids in my price range. Yet.

    • No range issues. No worries about finding plugs or any need to even consider charge levels. No concerns about -35C affecting battery performance in the winter.

      You describe how I feel about EVs. No range issues. No worries about petrol stations since I can run an extension chord from literally any place I'm parked at. No concerns about -35C freezing my fuel lines, my car is always ready to go with full charge.

      About zero percent chance I would buy an EV anytime soon

      One day you'll realise the boogeyman is just a story you were told as a child so you would behave.

      • No worries about petrol stations since I can run an extension chord from literally any place I'm parked at.

        Haha. That will scale well.

        Back when I drove a plow I had a huge collection of extension cords from people who thought the same. No EVs in those days, just dumb people with block heaters.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      I would never buy another fossil car. Doesn't start in -35C either, when the EV is just fine and nicely pre-heated from my phone.

      Too much hassle filling it up all the time, and looking for gas stations when electricity is absolutely everywhere. Why go out of my way when I can just charge at the destination if I need to? No standing around in the cold pumping gas for long cold minutes either, I can go to the bathroom or dine in comfort while it's charging.

      Noisy, smelly, it doesn't get a full tank of gas ever

      • Also my remote off-grid cabin in the mountains only has solar panels. I tried caching gas up there but a bear pissed in the can.

        That makes me wonder how many years until a natural disaster strikes and the only cars driving around a week later are EVs from households who have invested in solar.

        It's kind-of stunning to realize that if you're a real doomsday prepper or other fend-for-myself sort of person that an EV and some solar panels would give you total freedom of your own transportation. The Tesla X with a trailer hitch and a trailer with a pop-up solar panel and inverter, and at the worst you're stuck somewhere for a few days fo

      • Also my remote off-grid cabin in the mountains only has solar panels.

        You are totally the first person I think of when I envision the typical consumer.

  • Toyota Will Share 23,740 Hybrid Vehicle Patents For Free

    closely guarded patents

    For "share", surely it's actually "license for free", like IÂC.

    But "closely guarded" is nonsense. Patents are published for goodness sake.

  • Means what? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anubis IV ( 1279820 ) on Sunday April 07, 2019 @01:40PM (#58399000)

    Toyota's move to unlock its patents underlines its belief that hybrids are an effective alternative to all-battery EVs, given a fuel efficiency roughly double that of gasoline cars, lower cost and that they do not need charging infrastructure.

    Sounds to me like it underlines their belief that hybrids have no place in a future made almost entirely of EVs, so they've done the math and realized that there's no sense in clinging to patents that don't have a future. Better to cash in now by giving the patents away and making some money on the component/part purchases they'll receive during the shrinking window in which those patents remain relevant.

  • The Prius came out in Japan in 1997 [wikipedia.org]. Patents last for 20 years. The value of these patents is in steep decline already.

    • The summary says Toyota is offering free access through 2030, so I suspect a material part of the portfolio extends past that. It's not like there has been zero technological advancement since the first Prius.

    • Here is the link to all the patents listed to assignee 'Toyota' [uspto.gov]. There are 29,770 patents, and there are many that are granted not that long ago (10 million number). Here is another link that are specified with the word 'hybrid [uspto.gov]' in the patent title. There are 792 patents. Similarly, there are many patents that are granted not long ago too.

  • Toyota are seeing electric vehicles eat into their market so they are doing everything they can to sow confusion and doubt and generally delay the inevitable. Recent examples would be their foray into hydrogen powered vehicles and marketing their hybrids as "self charging" - a bullshit weasel term that applies to every car including combustion ones.

    I expect this announcement on patents is part of that strategy. The irony is that Toyota used to be ahead of the curve but they sat on their ass for too long a

  • ... 23,740 parts in a Prius?

  • ... The National Association of Buggy Whip Manufacturers completely removed membership fees, and has announced a brand new apprentice ship program to train new workers who just have pay the tuition fees.
  • Barring any "patent continuation" shenanigans, any patents covering its technology should have expired two years ago at the latest.

Slashdot Top Deals

news: gotcha

Close