Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Toyota Touts Solid State EVs with 932-Mile Range, 10-Minute Charging by 2027

pcmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 56 posts

Re: Toyota Touts Solid State EVs with 932-Mile Range, 10-Minute Charging by 2027

#31

Post by somewhat_drunk »

_hypx wrote: post #30
panick21_ wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HEV are just slightly more efficient, they still use 100% fossil fuels and still produce harmful emissions right in places where humans breath it. In terms of 6 PHEV to 1 EV. This math comes with a lot of issues. First, it only works if people actually plug in their PHEV constantly and evince shows that they don't. And if you don't a PHEV is just a ICE vehicle with a shitty engine. Plus the issue with PHEV is that th…

FCEVs are also EVs. People are simply being short-sighted about hydrogen. It will eventually replace BEVs.

FCEV "well to wheel" systemic efficiency is significantly lower than equivalent BEV systemic efficiency, and FCEVs are much more complex than BEVs. FCEV's only advantages over BEVs are faster charging times and moderately greater range, both of which are fast dwindling and will soon be gone. Hydrogen is a dead end, a decarbonization distraction being pushed by oil companies, policymakers engaging in the sunk cost fallacy, and those who would benefit financially from a widespread adoption of the tech.

Shame on all who continue to push hydrogen tech for selfish reasons.

https://medium.com/10x-curiosity/the-hydrogen-hopium-ea11c7a...

https://www.thegreatsimplification.com/episode/63-paul-marti...

>FCEVs are also EVs

This is a meaningless statement within the context of the FCEV vs BEV discussion. You keep saying it, so presumably you think it makes you sound clever? It doesn't. It has the opposite effect.

Re: Toyota Touts Solid State EVs with 932-Mile Range, 10-Minute Charging by 2027

#32

Post by panick21_ »

fwungy wrote: post #23
panick21_ wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HEV are just slightly more efficient, they still use 100% fossil fuels and still produce harmful emissions right in places where humans breath it. In terms of 6 PHEV to 1 EV. This math comes with a lot of issues. First, it only works if people actually plug in their PHEV constantly and evince shows that they don't. And if you don't a PHEV is just a ICE vehicle with a shitty engine. Plus the issue with PHEV is that th…

Most of the energy for BEVs is produced from fossil fuels as well. The Gorilla in the Room for fossil fuel emissions is Russia and OPEC. Are Russia and OPEC going to walk away from trillions of dollars of oil wealth? Are the developing nations, like India, going to walk away from cheap ICE technologies, for more expensive and complex green technologies? If not, all the aggressive switching by the OECD nations is for…

> Most of the energy for BEVs is produced from fossil fuels as well.

Globally yes, but in many places where there is lots of BEV takeup, this isn't the case.

Additionally you are ignoring that a vehicle with a 25 year lifetime will have improving carbon efficency.

You are also ignoring the single most important thing, pollution of case and coal plants are not produced right in cities where lots of people breath.

> Russia ... India

I'm not sure why you are expanding the discussion to these topics.

> If not, all the aggressive switching by the OECD nations is for naught.

This is a bad attitude. You can't just lose all hope and never do anything because India exists.

Proving green technology on large scale and driving down cost will have an impact on India and other nations too. EV cars are constitutionally simpler then ICE vehicles and have the potential to be cheaper eventually.

The emissions in city alone make switching worth it. The cars are also just straight better in terms of driving.

> Toyota believes the developing world will still want ICEs for a long time, and the oil nations will still want to sell it.

That's a straw man argument. I never said they should stop developing ICE or stop selling ICE in the developed world or even stop selling them in the West.

I said Toyota should stop bullshitting, pretending the EV isn't already a gigantic market and that lots costumers want EVs. Toyota basically claims EV currently are trash and nobody wants them (that is true for their own EVs).

Toyota clearly wanted to be innovative and focused on Hydrogen and it went nowhere (except for the government money going to their pocket). Toyota while claiming they are pro environment is pushing against all emissions regulation, wonder why that is.

Re: Toyota Touts Solid State EVs with 932-Mile Range, 10-Minute Charging by 2027

#33

Post by panick21_ »

_hypx wrote: post #30
panick21_ wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HEV are just slightly more efficient, they still use 100% fossil fuels and still produce harmful emissions right in places where humans breath it. In terms of 6 PHEV to 1 EV. This math comes with a lot of issues. First, it only works if people actually plug in their PHEV constantly and evince shows that they don't. And if you don't a PHEV is just a ICE vehicle with a shitty engine. Plus the issue with PHEV is that th…

FCEVs are also EVs. People are simply being short-sighted about hydrogen. It will eventually replace BEVs.

Yes, yes and so are vehicles running with flux capacitors and anti gravity devices and those have about the same relevance in the car market. Even the most pro hydrogen people have essentially given up on the car market. Hydrogen vehicles have failed so spectacularly in the market that anybody who still believes in them now is either straight up delusional or has some vested interest.

The hope remains alive in the heavy duty truck market but even there is not looking good and just like in cars they will get their ass kicked.

So my advice for the pro hydrogen crowed, is start claiming hydrogen is great for trucks for a few years and once that gig stops being credibly move on to ships.

Re: Toyota Touts Solid State EVs with 932-Mile Range, 10-Minute Charging by 2027

#34

Post by _hypx »

panick21_ wrote: post #33
_hypx wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FCEVs are also EVs. People are simply being short-sighted about hydrogen. It will eventually replace BEVs.

Yes, yes and so are vehicles running with flux capacitors and anti gravity devices and those have about the same relevance in the car market. Even the most pro hydrogen people have essentially given up on the car market. Hydrogen vehicles have failed so spectacularly in the market that anybody who still believes in them now is either straight up delusional or has some vested interest. The hope remains alive in the he…

[flagged]

Re: Toyota Touts Solid State EVs with 932-Mile Range, 10-Minute Charging by 2027

#35

Post by _hypx »

somewhat_drunk wrote: post #31
_hypx wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FCEVs are also EVs. People are simply being short-sighted about hydrogen. It will eventually replace BEVs.

FCEV "well to wheel" systemic efficiency is significantly lower than equivalent BEV systemic efficiency, and FCEVs are much more complex than BEVs. FCEV's only advantages over BEVs are faster charging times and moderately greater range, both of which are fast dwindling and will soon be gone. Hydrogen is a dead end, a decarbonization distraction being pushed by oil companies, policymakers engaging in the sunk cost fal…

That's total bullshit. A fuel cell is very simple. A FCEV will be significantly cheaper than comparable BEVs. They will cost no more than conventional hybrid cars to build.

BEV advocates are suffering from their own sunk cost fallacy. When BEVs die as a technology, it will be BEV companies that will reveal themselves to holding onto outdated ideas.

In fact it is already happening. The fact that BEV fans can't even acknowledge that FCEVs are also EVs is proof of this.

Re: Toyota Touts Solid State EVs with 932-Mile Range, 10-Minute Charging by 2027

#36

Post by panick21_ »

fwungy wrote: post #29
rasz wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

diverse indeed https://electrek.co/2021/11/11/how-toyota-sneakily-spreads-a...

electrek.co is hardly an objective source.

Toyota isn't hiding its stance on EV and environment. The are part of automotive lobbying groups preventing stricter emission standard. This isn't a conspiracy, just simple fact on what Toyota has been doing that. Everybody in the car industry knows this.

Re: Toyota Touts Solid State EVs with 932-Mile Range, 10-Minute Charging by 2027

#37

Post by panick21_ »

dangus wrote: post #13

Is this their sorry excuse for staying completely uncompetitive on current generation EVs? “Why bother making a competitive EV in 2023 when we know Superman is coming to earth and bringing Kryptonite batteries with him in 2027?”

Yes. And has been since 2014.

Re: Toyota Touts Solid State EVs with 932-Mile Range, 10-Minute Charging by 2027

#38

Post by seanmcdirmid »

fwungy wrote: post #28
Shaanie wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the car company revenue in the modern west vs India and other developing nations? I'm sure the developing world will still want ICE vehicles, but is that really where the money is?

There are billions of people in the developing world, China, India, Africa. Their income is low per capita, but the combined numbers are so high. Petroleum fuels are easy to store and transport in low infrastructure environments. Many areas don't have strong electric grids, they don't have 24hr electricity, and even if they do it's not reliable. They rely on inexpensive two and three wheeled vehicles extensively, muc…

Most of those countries don’t have access to their own oil reserves, so are at the mercy of importing, and unless they can get a deal an sanctioned Iranian or Russian oil, they have to pay the same as other countries. In contrast, they have many more ways to generate electricity, even locally off the grid, that don’t require imports. I’ve stayed in places in China that have electricity via a water wheel (not reliable for sure, but enough to charge a bike), and no gas station for hundreds of miles around given low population density.

Re: Toyota Touts Solid State EVs with 932-Mile Range, 10-Minute Charging by 2027

#39

Post by seanmcdirmid »

_hypx wrote: post #35
somewhat_drunk wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FCEV "well to wheel" systemic efficiency is significantly lower than equivalent BEV systemic efficiency, and FCEVs are much more complex than BEVs. FCEV's only advantages over BEVs are faster charging times and moderately greater range, both of which are fast dwindling and will soon be gone. Hydrogen is a dead end, a decarbonization distraction being pushed by oil companies, policymakers engaging in the sunk cost fal…

That's total bullshit. A fuel cell is very simple. A FCEV will be significantly cheaper than comparable BEVs. They will cost no more than conventional hybrid cars to build. BEV advocates are suffering from their own sunk cost fallacy. When BEVs die as a technology, it will be BEV companies that will reveal themselves to holding onto outdated ideas. In fact it is already happening. The fact that BEV fans can't even ac…

FCEV requires lots of compression, that compressed tank doesn’t come for free, and a lot of energy is lost to compression.

Re: Toyota Touts Solid State EVs with 932-Mile Range, 10-Minute Charging by 2027

#40

Post by _hypx »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #39
_hypx wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's total bullshit. A fuel cell is very simple. A FCEV will be significantly cheaper than comparable BEVs. They will cost no more than conventional hybrid cars to build. BEV advocates are suffering from their own sunk cost fallacy. When BEVs die as a technology, it will be BEV companies that will reveal themselves to holding onto outdated ideas. In fact it is already happening. The fact that BEV fans can't even ac…

FCEV requires lots of compression, that compressed tank doesn’t come for free, and a lot of energy is lost to compression.

Compressed gas is its own energy storage method. This is not a fundamental problem.

Also, it does not take that much energy to compress gas. Advancements in technology will reduce this to a tiny amount: https://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/9013_energy_requirement...

Post reply on HN