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

Toyota’s hydrogen-powered Mirai has experienced rapid depreciation

carbuzz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 520 posts

Re: Toyota’s hydrogen-powered Mirai has experienced rapid depreciation

#201

Post by buckle8017 »

BadBadJellyBean wrote: post #33
buckle8017 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pretty much every gas station already has [electricity]. Sure but they don't have electric vehicle recharging electricity. They have run the pumps and power the lights electricity.

Still seems like a smaller investment to get a bigger cable than H2 infrastructure (Tanks, Pumps, maybe even electrolysis system).

Bigger cable is a laugh.

Bigger cable, upgraded delivery infrastructure to support that cable (think more or stronger poles), transformer upgrades, and finally the charging stations which unlike the home ones aren't just a complicated switch because DC fast charging.

H2 is a stupid fuel, but the idea that high power vehicle charging stations are a cheap or simple upgrade to a gas station is ridiculous.

Re: Toyota’s hydrogen-powered Mirai has experienced rapid depreciation

#202

Post by seltzered_ »

Theres something clickbaity and missing from this article, I encourage watching youtubers like 'mirai club' for better info. What i recall from his videos is:

- The Mirai made financial sense AS A LEASE for folks in Southern California back in 2022 (possibly 2023) because:

  - Car prices in general (including EVs) were fairly highly priced at the time due to demand, the chip shortage, etc.

  - There were clean vehicle incentives to get a Toyota Mirai, including things like a hydrogen fuel fill up card to cover expenses.

  - At the time there was some assumptions that hydrogen fuel costs would go down over time, but they actually went up.
Again, I suspect most folks LEASED the Mirai due to it being a very niche car with limited usage outside of california due to the lack of hydrogen fuel stations. Youre now seeing some viral videos on the ultra low cost used Mirai's showing up in states that dont have hydrogen infrastructure due to some odd car dealer auction buys (Transport Evolved has a youtube video on this.)

The article does talk about the lack of investment in hydrogen infrastructure, this is true and theres been a huge split between announced infrastructure investments and what has actually happened (see https://bsky.app/profile/janrosenow.bsky.social/post/3labfzi... for a chart going through 2021-2024). The current US political situation and its impact on clean energy probably doesn't help either.

Re: Toyota’s hydrogen-powered Mirai has experienced rapid depreciation

#203

Post by belorn »

aunty_helen wrote: post #60

Kinda glad this is the case. When people go out of their way to avoid common sense they should be punished. Hydrogen is such a terrible idea it was never getting off the ground. There seems to be some kind of psychosis around it being the next oil and therefore greedy people want to get in early on. But this blinds them to the basic chemistry and physics.

People looked at how the cost of wind and solar went down and made a assumption that green hydrogen would follow. The reasoning was that the cost of green hydrogen was energy, and thus at some point green hydrogen would be too cheap to meter.

The whole energy plan of central/northen Europe, especially Germany, was built for the last several decades on the idea that they would combine wind, solar and cheap natural gas and then replace the natural gas part with green hydrogen. In Sweden there were even several municipalities that spear headed this by switching mass transportation and heating towards hydrogen, initially with hydrogen produced through natural gas, as a way to get ahead on this plan.

The more sensible project were the green steel project. As experts in green hydrogen said consistently said through those decades, is that green steel would be the real test to make green hydrogen economical. The economics of burning it for energy or transportation would come several decades later, if ever. The green steel project however has not ended up as planned and gotten severely delayed and has seen a cost increase by an estimated 10x. municipalities are now giving up the hydrogen infrastructure and giving it an early retirement, as maintenance costs was significantly underestimated. There is very little talk now about replacing natural gas with green hydrogen, and the new plan is instead to replace the natural gas with bio fuels, hinted at carbon capture, at some unspecified time.

Re: Toyota’s hydrogen-powered Mirai has experienced rapid depreciation

#204

Post by cheema33 »

nandomrumber wrote: post #143
dehrmann wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Hydrogen is such a terrible idea it was never getting off the ground. It's coming from Toyota because Toyota can't wrap its head around not making engines. Ironically, the place hydrogen might work is airplanes where the energy density of batteries doesn't work.

Has the hydrogen storage problem been solved yet? Last time I checked it needs to be stored in cryo / pressure vessel and it also leaks through steel and ruins its structural properties in the process.

> Has the hydrogen storage problem been solved yet?

No. Not for using Hydrogen for transportation. People have been trying to use Hydrogen for transportation for more than 50 years. These people are trying to bend the laws of physics. And there are a lot of con artists in the mix who prey on the gullible. See the convicted fraudster Trevor Milton of Nikola fame.

Re: Toyota’s hydrogen-powered Mirai has experienced rapid depreciation

#207

Post by jeffbee »

WalterBright wrote: post #170
capitainenemo wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, there's also burning regular fuel in a fuel cell, a FCEV. That doubles the efficiencies over ICE, so I guess that bumps it back up to 8x away? Given the great energy densities and stability in transport of hydrocarbons, there's already some plants out there synthesising them directly from green sources, so that could be a solution if we don't manage to increase battery densities by another order of magnitude.

> there's already some plants out there synthesising them directly from green sources I didn't realize that a "green" carbon atom is different from a regular carbon atom. They both result in CO2 when burned.

Its the time shift. Burning a plant releases CO2 and it is still considered to be carbon neutral.

Re: Toyota’s hydrogen-powered Mirai has experienced rapid depreciation

#208

Post by beAbU »

numpad0 wrote: post #71
joecool1029 wrote: post #12

Why was it made? I ask because GM’s EV-1 was discussed earlier and it basically existed due to California’s zero-emission requirement in the 90’s. Is this just Toyota doing some random R&D while fulfilling a state minimum requirement?

I think that + it's an EV that Toyota don't have to source the battery cells. FCEVs are full EVs just like Tesla, that uses a different kind of battery than Li-ion.

The latest model comes with a li-ion battery pack. Previous model had Nimh cells I think.

Re: Toyota’s hydrogen-powered Mirai has experienced rapid depreciation

#209

Post by nandomrumber »

robertjpayne wrote: post #193
TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And, the two major byproducts of burning hydrocarbons are water and carbon dioxide. Literally essential plant nutrients, essential for life. Tangentially related, the 2022 Hunga Tonga–Hunga Haʻapai volcanic eruption ejected so much water vapour in to the upper atmosphere, it was estimated to have ongoing climate forcing effects for up to 10 years. Water vapour is a stronger greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. And we…

Please, the media didn't report on this because natural disasters affecting the climate is not controllable by humans and thus doesn't warrant a global effort to address unless it's so large as to be species ending. Global warming is not fake, there's tons and tons of evidence it is real and the weather is getting more and more extreme as humans continue to burn petrol.

Yes, and it doesn’t fit the narrative.

We should be moving towards being able to terraform Earth not because of anthropogenic climate forcing, but because one volcano or one space rock could render our atmosphere overnight rather uncomfortable.

You won’t find the Swedish Doom Goblin saying anything about that.

> burn petrol.

Well yeah, so making electricity unreliable and expensive, and the end-user’s problem (residential roof-top solar) is somehow supposed help?

Let’s ship all our raw minerals and move all our manufacturing overseas to counties that care less about environmental impacts and have dirtier electricity, then ship the final products back, all using the dirties bunker fuel there is.

How is that supposed to help?

I mean, I used to work for The Wilderness Society in South Australia, now I live in Tasmania and am a card carrying One Nation member.

Because I’m not a complete fucking idiot.

Wait till you learn about the nepotism going on with the proposed Bell Bay Windfarm and Cimitiere Plains Solar projects.

I’m all for sensible energy project development, but there’s only so much corruption I’m willing to sit back and watch.

With the amount of gas, coal, and uraniam Australia has, it should be a manufacturing powerhouse, and host a huge itinerant worker population with pathways to residency / citizenship, drawn from the handful of countries that built this country. And citizens could receive a monthly stipend as their share of the enormous wealth the country should be generating.

Japan resells our LNG at a profit. Our government is an embarrassment.

Re: Toyota’s hydrogen-powered Mirai has experienced rapid depreciation

#210

Post by nomel »

Lerc wrote: post #149
qingcharles wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The energy density doesn't work for now . Everybody hoping for that breakthrough, and battery aircraft are moving into certain sectors (drone delivery, air taxis etc).

Structural batteries were supposed to be the solution where the density wasn't so important. I don't really have a good understanding of the ration of fuel weight to structural weight in existing aircraft though.

casing is around 25% of the mass of a cylindrical cell, with the rest being actual battery bits that can't have any stresses applied. is 25% weight saving that significant?
Post reply on HN