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

Toyota has stepped up lobbying to preserve its investments in hybrids, hydrogen

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 315 posts

Re: Toyota has stepped up lobbying to preserve its investments in hybrids, hydrogen

#261

Post by rantwasp »

ashtonkem wrote: post #256
rantwasp wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i agree with you in principle, but (there’s always a but) there are other more impactful things that can be done to cut down carbon emissions (modern cars are already stupid-efficient). Who has the mora authority to declare that Toyota should roll over and die to attain some goal that may or may not be achievable?

> Who has the mora authority to declare that Toyota should roll over and die to attain some goal that may or may not be achievable? False dilemma. Toyota could start making EVs instead. If they decide to (stupidly) refuse to do that, then their death would be the result of their own stubbornness, not a declared death sentence from someone else. And as far as who has the moral authority? Anyone who stands to face the…

lol no. business decisions are driven by economic incentives. I’m not saying it’s right or wrong but that’s the way the world works today.

you have the authority to decide only to the point of electing politicians that push what you consider to be the right thing. This takes time.

How would you feel if you would personally be targeted in an effort to reduce global warming? While at the same time other actors (that basically do the same thing and/or are protected by regulations do way worse? https://thedigitalmomentum.com/the-top-five-co2-emitting-ind...)

That EV you dream of as stopping global warming may overall be responsible for more CO2 emission that my “normal” car depending on how the power you use has been generated.

Re: Toyota has stepped up lobbying to preserve its investments in hybrids, hydrogen

#262

Post by rantwasp »

ramesh31 wrote: post #25
wil421 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disagree. 2016 VW: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-eoEKrjAtM 2016 4runner: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcm1nz_Zwn8 The VW looks similar to my FCA uConnect system. The 4runner looks like an Alpine head unit I put in my 2002 4 runner in the 2008/9 timeframe. Pretty sure Toyota killed the CD player in the last 3-4 years.

Yeah Toyota literally did not offer Apple CarPlay on any trim level of any vehicle until the 2020 model year, it was insane.

to be fair Apple CarPlay was vaporware until recently. Some may say it’s still not the best experience/integration.

Re: Toyota has stepped up lobbying to preserve its investments in hybrids, hydrogen

#263

Post by ppp_qqq »

mikem170 wrote: post #259

> Toyota has stepped up lobbying to preserve its investments in hybrids, hydrogen Am I the only one who thinks it is 100% wrong that companies can give politicians hundreds of millions of dollars? Politicians are supposed to represent people. Real breathing people. Sampling a handful of other countries, like Canada, Germany, Japan, etc. I found that they all pretty much banned (or drastically curtailed) donations for…

There is an argument that can be made (whether good or not, not sure) that politicians represent the interest of people including whether they want Toyota to flourish or not, and represent the employee of Toyota, etc.

Banning giving money to politicians is fixing a symptom rather than the root cause.

Better is ban government from directing market competition. Why is the gov telling people and companies what to make when? People should do that by their choices. Tesla is a good example of something good is happening by the market. It motivated other companies to innovate in the space.

Re: Toyota has stepped up lobbying to preserve its investments in hybrids, hydrogen

#264

Post by Causality1 »

Robotbeat wrote: post #161
dragonwriter wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Their only one, the Prius Prime, is more expensive than its competitors and offers less than half their range. What's the point of getting a PHEV if I still spend half my commute running on gasoline? The Prime has a 25 mile battery range, which is well over the average driven commute distance in the US (its about the average daily driven distance for drivers.)

It’s about half of what you’d need to comfortably go without gas the vast, vast majority of time. The Chevy Volt has about the right plug in electric range (50 miles) for a future where we have to basically synthesize all fuels.

Exactly. It's a future proof car. If gas gets much more expensive you're ok. If the battery ages and dies you're still ok.

Re: Toyota has stepped up lobbying to preserve its investments in hybrids, hydrogen

#265

Post by Robotbeat »

kongolongo wrote: post #248
Robotbeat wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A sidenote but unless public transport vehicles are electric, they won’t be better than battery electric vehicles. Typical diesel buses with typical occupancy rates have worse emissions per passenger mile then, say, a model three with a typical occupancy rate and grid emissions factor in US. BEVs are fantastic, have SOME level of infrastructure literally everywhere with electricity (you literally can charge from a 12…

Personal vehicles also have a much larger carbon footprint in general (from manufacturing, maintenance, etc) aside from just emissions during operation of the vehicle.

Operations dominate the total carbon footprint of a gasoline fueled private vehicle. (And public transport buses as well.) so the comparison still is valid. To compete, buses need to also be electric (which is, to be fair!, super easy… electrifying all city buses is incredibly easy compared to electrifying all personal vehicles.)

Re: Toyota has stepped up lobbying to preserve its investments in hybrids, hydrogen

#266

Post by stjohnswarts »

eloff wrote: post #35
ajmurmann wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why mandate how emissions are cut, instead of heavily taxing carbon emissions and having the market find the best solution?

In general I agree with you. Simply taxing things with negative externalities enough to cover the true cost would simply and conclusively fix a lot of things we struggle with, faster and without relying on politicians. I think it's politically very unpopular, but the economic theory behind it is extremely sound.

Mostly because it makes the poors even more poor and when you live in a democracy that's a hard feat to overcome because they're going to vote for candidates who promise to make them not more poor.

Re: Toyota has stepped up lobbying to preserve its investments in hybrids, hydrogen

#267

Post by stjohnswarts »

chii wrote: post #54
seph-reed wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really hope liquid democracy can someday become a thing. The fact that an idea can be both good and unpopular is -- IMO -- the linchpin of almost every other problem we face.

> an idea can be both good and unpopular communism is a good idea, but it's unpopular, for a reason i say. The reason for the idea of taxing externalities being unpopular isn't really proven yet - after all, it hasn't been instated, but just spoken about, and the silent majority don't have an opinion!

Communism is unpopular because it says people on average are unimportant and the "greater good" is more important. Most people aren't going to glom onto that when they realize that's the real result as easily demonstrated in any number of failed communist countries, even China gave it up and moved to a more totalitarian one party system that allows some free market ideas in. apparently they're even moving to a dictatorship steadily rather than communism.

Re: Toyota has stepped up lobbying to preserve its investments in hybrids, hydrogen

#268

Post by singingfish »

Retric wrote: post #144
winternett wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3 major problems none of the EV evangelists are addressing about with EVs are 1. What happens to all the giant lithium batteries on these vehicles after they reach end of life? 2. How will people be able to evacuate a city or state in an emergency situation when charging/electric supply is not present (which is always likely to happen)? 3. Coal burning infrastructure is still inextricably involved in generating the p…

3) 36% of global grid power comes from coal down from 41% in 2013. It’s expected to hit 22% by 2040. Secondly coal isn’t nearly as bad as you might thing relative to gasoline. Simply producing gasoline releases significant CO2. Refineries alone release approximately 2.5 lb of CO2 for each gallon of gas, add in exploration, extraction, and transportation means gasoline is doing a lot of damage before reaching your car…

My physisicist friends did the sums (for professional reasons). Electric vehicles produce less CO2 even if the electricity comes from dirty sources.

Re: Toyota has stepped up lobbying to preserve its investments in hybrids, hydrogen

#269

Post by mikem170 »

ppp_qqq wrote: post #263
mikem170 wrote: post #259

> Toyota has stepped up lobbying to preserve its investments in hybrids, hydrogen Am I the only one who thinks it is 100% wrong that companies can give politicians hundreds of millions of dollars? Politicians are supposed to represent people. Real breathing people. Sampling a handful of other countries, like Canada, Germany, Japan, etc. I found that they all pretty much banned (or drastically curtailed) donations for…

There is an argument that can be made (whether good or not, not sure) that politicians represent the interest of people including whether they want Toyota to flourish or not, and represent the employee of Toyota, etc. Banning giving money to politicians is fixing a symptom rather than the root cause. Better is ban government from directing market competition. Why is the gov telling people and companies what to make w…

> There is an argument that can be made (whether good or not, not sure) that politicians represent the interest of people including whether they want Toyota to flourish or not, and represent the employee of Toyota, etc.

We supposedly live in a democracy, where the people are supposed to be in charge, not abstract constructs like companies, unions, or trade associations. People vote, not companies. People should be funding political campaigns, not companies.

Why should a CEO or small group of people get to decide how to deploy enormous resources to influence politician's so that they do things that run counter to the public good, just so they can make more money? This is what corporations are legally obligated to do, right? Make more money.

> Better is ban government from directing market competition. Why is the gov telling people and companies what to make when? People should do that by their choices. Tesla is a good example of something good is happening by the market. It motivated other companies to innovate in the space.

Your comment above seems to imply that people should accept that they fund companies through their purchases and these companies will then fund politicians? That seems contrary to the spirit of the constitution.

Or maybe I'm not following the connection you're making between campaign financing and market competition. To my way of thinking the government should be run by the people, and if the people want market competition among companies then that should be the rule. People should be deciding this, not politicians who feel they are dependent on corporate campaign donations for their ego boosting careers.

It seems like such a flaw in our system. I looked at a handful of other civilized countries and I haven't found one yet that allows this stuff like in the U.S. Time and time again in the news I see companies having their way with our government.

Re: Toyota has stepped up lobbying to preserve its investments in hybrids, hydrogen

#270

Post by theluketaylor »

cycomanic wrote: post #257
theluketaylor wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For extreme range the extra weight starts to cost efficiency and you get diminishing returns, but I think my model 3 sr+ is close to the optimal balance. 50 kWh battery gets me 400 km range and weighs right in line with other compact and midsized sedans at 1600 kg. Charging speed is fast enough that long road trips are not a big deal. There isn't a single ICE car in the same footprint with that much storage space or…

>There isn't a single ICE car in the same footprint with that much storage space or forward visibility. That is demonstrably false. The size of the Tesla is the about same as a Volvo V60. The V60 has >500 l of storage volume compared to the 385l of the Tesla. Similarly the Seat Octavia has also more than 500l storage volume (even in the sedan version). So yes there are plenty of ICE cars of that size which have the s…

> The size of the Tesla is the about same as a Volvo V60

Of course a model 3 doesn't have as much space inside as an estate/wagon. It makes more sense to compare a model y there. I could only find rear seats folded where it's 1920 L for model y and 1440 L for v60 (That might include the Y's frunk as well; the sources are not clear).

The 3/Y also crush the volvo for aerodynamics at 0.29 vs 0.23

In real world driving at 110-120 km/hr I get well under 150 kWh/100 km in my SR+. I wasn't able to find the ADAC testing, but they either did it at 130 km/hr+ or it was quite cold out.

Post reply on HN