backtop


Print 85 comment(s) - last by namechamps.. on Sep 21 at 9:22 AM


Toyota is betting big on the hydrogen for the long term. Its first fuel cell vehicles (like the Toyota FCHV pictured here at the 2008 New York Auto Show) may debut in 2015. Meanwhile it is scorning electric plug-in offerings.

Toyota plans on continuing to use less efficient nickel-metal batteries in its future Prius vehicles. It believes lithium-based batteries are too expensive for the efficiency gains they offer.
From battery chemistry, to electric vehicle adoption, Toyota isn't going with the flow

If you used industry-wide levels of interest in lithium-ion battery technology and electric vehicles as a barometer, both of these fields are at record highs.  In the U.S., the former "Big Three" -- GM, Chrysler, and Ford -- all have electric vehicles planned for release, with the GM's 2011 Chevy Volt being perhaps the biggest attraction.  In Germany, Daimler and child company Mercedes-Benz have both concepts and planned market EVs.  And in Japan, Nissan is gearing up to debut the electric-only 2011 Leaf EV.  All of these companies' electric efforts are driven by lithium-ion batteries, and these batteries are going in their hybrids as well.

The world's most successful vendor of electric vehicle technology, albeit in the form of mild hybrids, Toyota is going against the current on both of these trends, though.  In a new Bloomberg report aired concurrent with the Frankfurt Auto Show, it is revealed that Toyota extensively tested lithium-ion batteries as a potential replacement for the nickel-metal hydride batteries in its Prius and other mild hybrids.

What it found was that while the batteries were extremely efficient and didn't raise serious reliability or safety concerns, they were overly expensive for the gains they provided.  For that reason, Toyota reportedly concluded that the market wasn't ready for lithium and has decided to primarily continue with its nickel-based batteries for most of its hybrid cars.

Toyota also concluded that electric vehicles were too expensive to succeed in the current market.  Toyota Executive Vice President Takeshi Uchiyamada stated at a Frankfurt Auto Show press conference, "Electric vehicles of today are less costly than in 1990s, but if you compare them with the other vehicles out there they are still too expensive.  Unless there is a very big breakthrough in battery costs I don't think electric vehicles can take a large market share."

Toyota indicated that it will likely stay out of the electric vehicle market for close to a decade, the time it believes it will take for EVs to become profitable and affordable enough for the masses.

So is Toyota right?  It's hard to say.  Toyota's demonstration of business acumen over the last several years is hard to argue, given its ability to produce the first profitable mass-production hybrid, the Prius, which leads worldwide hybrid sales to date.  Furthermore, there are a handful of competitors, such as Germany's Audi, whose management are split on the viability of electric vehicles (Audi's North American president recently called buyers of the Chevy Volt EV "idiots"). 

On the other hand, the vast majority of the industry is shifting towards all electrics, and if Toyota counts on its competitors to lower production costs, it may find itself in a foreign hole when it finally decides to enter the market.  While some of the German automakers are pushing for clean diesel as a supplement or alternative to hybrids, Toyota is pushing hydrogen as a long term solution, a technology that faces significant production, transport, and storage obstacles -- all of which raise the price.  Toyota may release a fuel cell (hydrogen) car by 2015, according to recent reports. 

So for now Toyota is opting for one of the least expensive and most proven solutions (mild hybrids), while its mid-to-long term efforts focus on what is currently the most expensive and least proven solution of them all -- hydrogen.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Ammonia fuel cells & micro-turbines
By 2tweeked on 9/17/2009 12:41:31 AM , Rating: 1
The technology is there but lacks serious application. Why? Oil companies. The Ammonia possibility has the hydrogen punch for fuel cells. Let that be the focus meanwhile micro-turbines can be a replacement for the assist battery recharge piston engine. Not all needs to be bleak. The oil monopolies are resisting change and the auto manufactures are meeting green resistance from them. We can stand together and say no to routine business as usual. Our collective brain power can brake the chains that enslave us. New technology application means new opportunity and investment. Yes to change means new profits and a cleaner planet.




RE: Ammonia fuel cells & micro-turbines
By 2tweeked on 9/17/2009 1:05:52 AM , Rating: 2
I want to add that my Japanese & Chinese brothers & sisters are not clouded by our American current cultural mind limitations. Face the facts, American education and innovation is in a mental depression by design at this point in history. America has been "dumbed" down. I want to see humanity as a whole to awaken. To put aside national grievances and achieve our human potential in totality. Greed and profit are not the answer. Yes, let us respect our individual states and sovereignty spheres of management but as a group of humanity, explore and solve in peace and prosperity for all. Thank you!


By 2tweeked on 9/17/2009 2:06:22 AM , Rating: 1
Forgive me readers, but I am very passionate on this issue of individual transportation. Perhaps we should consider something different and more efficient. I deeply enjoy individual transportation but if there is a technological solution I am equally to adapt. Suppose there is a public transportation solution to the individual need to transportation.

What if we could concentrate on personal rapid transit? It would be like a personal taxi cab. You would simply designate destination and it would take you there without unruly passengers. PRT could be programmed not to let felons to travel into your neighborhood. In disaster scenarios, PRTs can be programmed to take you to safe areas. PRTs can make your morning commute a non stressful event because the system would know where you need to be. Your children can go to events and you would know where they are. Cargo & mail are always tracked to destination. Its about individual travel without the hassle of owning a vehicle. Its energy wise, productive and beneficial to the environment.

See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtrB82YObXw

Perhaps we wouldn't need a rail type system but another intelligent packet type vehicle that is street inductor powered and guided. The options our endless to our imaginations. It is a question of will and application. Explore the vision is all I ask.


"We can't expect users to use common sense. That would eliminate the need for all sorts of legislation, committees, oversight and lawyers." -- Christopher Jennings














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki