Is the end of Battery EVs coming?

Toyota have always been anti EV , including adverts ridiculing plug in cars as well as trying to change the narrative of hybrids which are incapable of being plugged in to becoming "self charging hybrids".

Its a shame imo, as toyota have produced some great cars over the years, and even really went for it early doors with decent hybrids....... but they backed the wrong horse with hydrogen (or at least by going that way at the expense of EVs) and are now looking to be a fair way behind all their competition.

I love the styling of the C-HR and would happily have bought one if they did an EV version - or at least a plug in version with a proper decent battery only range.... instead we got an i3.
 
Last edited:
Assuming we are to stop or greatly reduce the reliance on oil, then different aspects of motivation will have to use different sources of power.

Short distances will suit EVs. The UK is well suited to EVs. More than happy with my IPace

Hydrogen doesn't really seem to have the traction perhaps it should have. Storage seems the biggest drawback.

"Green methanol" might suit for freight/industrial. Maersk have ordered 3 or 6 methanol powered tankers.

EV cars are expensive which has slowed sales, lease options are not what they were (£200 a month for a Golf R won't be happening again any time soon) so that has reduced demand. The world economy is struggling so manufacturing is being scaled back. I'd be interested to see if ICE car sales and manufacturing has increased, decreased, stayed the same over the same period. ICE are cheaper to buy and lease and insure so if "we" are turning our backs on EV, should that not mean that ICE sales and manufacturing should be increased.?
 
Toyota have always been anti EV , including adverts ridiculing plug in cars as well as trying to change the narrative of hybrids which are incapable of being plugged in to becoming "self charging hybrids".

Its a shame imo, as toyota have produced some great cars over the years, and even really went for it early doors with decent hybrids....... but they backed the wrong horse with hydrogen (or at least by going that way at the expense of EVs) and are now looking to be a fair way behind all their competition.

I love the styling of the C-HR and would happily have bought one if they did an EV version - or at least a plug in version with a proper decent battery only range.... instead we got an i3.
They had an all electric EV RAV 4 too, many years ago, but didn't sell many. I noticed someone had one running and think they said most of them still are.
I think they can easily catch up tbh but I don't think they currently feel the need to go all in. Some dismiss their hybrids and state they're starting from scratch with EV's but I don't believe that personally. They have vast amounts of electrification knowledge behind them. That said, the bz4x is a bit rubbish but I don't doubt they'll probably outlast most current gen EV's in terms of longevity especially as a 10 year warranty is included.
 
Last edited:
Not going with hydrogen is a political decision, well... a greed decision. Hydrogen is easy to harvest, so politicians won't be able to sit on the boards of a handful of giant corporations producing it as small companies could do it. There is nothing to mine or recycle so it's a lot more accessible, you just need water and electricity then a way to capture it.
 
Last edited:
Not going with hydrogen is a political decision, well... a greed decision. Hydrogen is easy to harvest, you get it from water, you don't need to mine anything or recycle anything. It's just gas or liquid fuel when compressed. Small business could do it. It takes a lot of energy but so does making batteries and it's very messy.

Basically politicians can't sit on the boards of giant corporations and make lots of money if we have loads of hydrogen producers all over the place. They wouldn't be a monopoly like with oil.
Comparing a one-off energy usage (battery manufacturing) with an ongoing usage of 3-4x is questionable.

In the same way that a BEV produces more carbon to manufacture - which hits the breakeven point after around 18k miles in this country, and then is forever lower than an ICE car - that extra carbon is nothing compared to the 3-4x more carbon for every mile that a H2FCEV would spit out.

EDIT: I see you did a ninja edit. I'm keeping your OP for posterity, given you admit it uses a lot of energy.
 
Last edited:
Comparing a one-off energy usage (battery manufacturing) with an ongoing usage of 3-4x is questionable.

In the same way that a BEV produces more carbon to manufacture - which hits the breakeven point after around 18k miles in this country, and then is forever lower than an ICE car - that extra carbon is nothing compared to the 3-4x more carbon for every mile that a H2FCEV would spit out.

EDIT: I see you did a ninja edit. I'm keeping your OP for posterity, given you admit it uses a lot of energy.

18k? More like 118k. Plus the mess actually mining the minerals makes. Then when you inevitably need to replace batteries that increases.
 
Last edited:
But then why hydrogen? Hopefully batteries keep progressing also? Drop their weight and increase capacity (and charge rate) and we’re sorted for majority of applications.

Because existing designs can be adapted or even retrofitted to run on hydrogen, which is a big carbon saving in itself. I don't mean just cars. E.g What is the replacement fuel for portable generators? Can't use batteries. Aircraft and shipping too.
 
Last edited:
Because existing designs can be adapted or even retrofitted to run on hydrogen, which is a big carbon saving in itself. I don't mean just cars. E.g What is the replacement fuel for portable generators? Can't use batteries. Aircraft and shipping too.
I'm sure they have electric aircraft and boats so put the money into it you will get results
 
Back
Top Bottom