12 ms·

I'm a layman but to me its about optics when Toyota doesn't have any EVs but is spending money on hydrogen development, and the aeons-old Prius. Most people are

by llampx 4y ago

I'm a layman but to me its about optics when Toyota doesn't have any EVs but is spending money on hydrogen development, and the aeons-old Prius. Most people are convinced that gas vehicles are not the future, and that renewable-energy powered personal vehicles and mass transit are. BMW and Toyota just look like they got caught with their pants down by not having appealing vehicles, and other companies are now stealing their lunch. On top of that, Toyota has had some shady business too: https://cleantechnica.com/2021/07/30/toyota-actively-lobbying-to-slow-down-ev-revolution/ https://cleantechnica.com/2021/07/30/toyota-actively-lobbyin...

awer897tyaiurfh 4y ago
resoluteteeth 4y ago
Toyota has phevs (plug-in hybrids) that can run fully off of the battery. They have gotten a lot of shit over the past year for arguing that these should be incentivized by the government in addition to full electric vehicles, but I think there is some merit to their position. Right now a lot of people who buy electric cars are wealthier people who also own other cars. This is not inherently bad and, for example, if a household that is going to own multiple cars either way chooses to make one of those electric it may be a win for the environment, but if people are buying extra cars because they are excited about electric cars but also need a conventional car when they go longer distances, that may not actually be that great. Until there are sufficient charger networks everywhere, it might actually be better to incentives phevs to build up the infrastructure and ensure that people who can only afford to own one car but need to travel longer distances can still use electricity for shorter trips in the form of phevs rather than continuing to use conventional cars. It's not completely clear if EV adoption will continue to accelerate or if it's going to hit limits when we run out of people who can easily switch. Toyota may have a point in that the current timetable for full adoption of evs may be unrealistic, and if it is, it might be better to compromise slightly more if it makes it easier to build up the infrastructure on a more realistic timetable rather than risk hitting a wall If we set the goal as 100% of vehicles being EVs in a relatively short amount of time, we're going to run into problems who are currently unable to use EVs because of the lack of a fast charger network. (In reality, battery swapping would probably make sense for longer trips once everyone is using evs, but there is zero infrastructure for that right now.) That said, another issue with electric cars in general is that for the type of short trip where they make the most sense, it might arguably be better for the environment to focus on electric public transportation when possible anyway (especially non-battery-powered street cars and light rail which aren't affected by supply of some of the elements required for batteries). Also, if we can't hit the targets for EV adoption we may have difficulty hitting environmental goals in general.
- MerelyMortal 4y ago
  Doomberg has a position that I agree with: It's better for 6 or 7 plug-in hybrids to be developed using the same amount of batteries materials it would take to make one fully-electric vehicle. Most people make short-range daily trips each day, and they could probably do 100% on the battery of a hybrid. The gas portion would kick-in when they do an occassional longer trip. No significant change to infrastructure would be required, and gasoline use would go down dramatically as most people would be using the smaller battery most of the time, and adoption would be way faster than fully-electric.
  - CameronNemo 4y ago
    The Prius Prime (PHEV) maxes out at 25 miles of electric range. And that is under optimal conditions. The average daily commute is longer than that.
    - mlyle 4y ago
      I have a Honda Clarity. 48 mile range, though I only charge it to 90%. I've gone 15,000 miles now on about 30 gallons of gas. I keep trying to get over "500 miles to the gallon" but that's a limit I have a hard time surpassing: occasional long trips or forgetting to charge does me in. (Not to mention the car will occasionally burn gas on its own just to confirm the engine is in good working order). It seems like it would be a waste for me to have a 200-300 mile range and no engine. The longest trips would still have been less convenient. And you could build 4-7 cars like mine with the same battery resources.
      - ok_dad 4y ago
        Ideally one could configure their hybrid car with different battery to gas tank ratios when they buy it, or perhaps even for a fee after purchase.
        mlyle 4y ago
        Gas tanks are small and light compared to batteries and engines. It all comes down to how much battery you want, and whether you want an engine.
tomohawk 4y ago
I think you've hit on something here. In this day when what is seen on social media is all that matters, practical engineering and science concerns definitely take a back seat. But there's another explanation for why Toyota does not have an EV lineup - they have been pursuing hybrid, hydrogen, and other tech for years. They have a long term vision instead of one that is just based on what is in social media or on what politicians have suddenly decided to subsidize. Since when is ground truth found on social media or from politicians? It remains to be seen who will be caught out. It also seems nonsensical to place all our eggs in the EV basket.
- XorNot 4y ago
  The other interpretation is that their solid state battery technology is taking a long time to commercialize and meanwhile all their competitors have products in the market: https://www.drive.com.au/news/toyota-hybrids-to-adopt-solid-state-battery-tech-by-2025-report/ https://www.drive.com.au/news/toyota-hybrids-to-adopt-solid-...
spacehunt 4y ago
Don't they have the bZ4X? Granted it's only one model, but still it's one more than "doesn't have any EVs".
- CameronNemo 4y ago
  That is a 2023 vehicle AIUI.
  - spacehunt 4y ago
    They issued one recall already, so I assumed at least some are in customers' hands?
    - mint2 4y ago
      you mean parked useless into their garages. Their wheels literally fall off and they are not supposed to drive them. Toyota offered to buy back all of them.
ddoolin 4y ago
I agree Toyota doesn't have very appealing vehicles, but they were the best-selling manufacturer for one Q last year and they've been #2 only to GM for quite some time. Given what happened during COVID supply issues, I'd say they're the ones stealing lunches.
- 7speter 4y ago
  They don’t have appeal? Only if you want to become friends with your mechanic.
  - ddoolin 4y ago
    Touché. I just meant (mostly) looks and feature-wise.
TheLoafOfBread 4y ago
Toyota is probably only company who understands that poor people can't afford BEVs and will be left behind. And introducing another EV Hummer or Cybertruck for 100k USD won't really help them to get affordable EV. I am convinced that BEV are not the future, because there is not enough of material, especially there is not enough copper. Assoc Prof Simon Michaux on shortage of copper https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBVmnKuBocc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBVmnKuBocc https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/14/copper-is-key-to-electric-vehicles-wind-and-solar-power-were-short-supply.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/14/copper-is-key-to-electric-ve...
- tuatoru 4y ago
  Michaux takes a long time to get to the point, even at double speed. None of what I have heard in the first 20 minutes is new to anyone who followed the Peak Oil debate back in the 2005-2009 period. His estimate of required battery capacity for short-distance and light vehicles, around 62 TWh, matches a quick back-of-the envelope calculation, so that's good. The description for the video is unpromising, blurring the distinction between reserves (known, characterized, owned) and resources (varying degrees of knowness, characterization, unowned), and implying we face a binary situation: plenty of resources, and then nothing. The world is not like that. There is always a spectrum of possibilities. We have an extremely abundant adequate substitute for copper for electrical uses: aluminum. The bulk of electrical distribution systems is steel-cored aluminum wire. Is copper better? Yes. Is it so much better than aluminum that the latter is unusable? No. Aluminum's lower electrical and thermal conductivities will require design changes (higher voltage, lower current), and overall efficiency won't be as good as with copper. Very sad. But aluminum is still perfectly usable for EV motors. And there are ways to eke out the copper we have, such as copper-clad aluminum wire (CCAW), which is already extensively used in loudspeakers. Some high currents flow in subwoofer voice coils. As for poor people being left behind, resource prices are not the cause. Very few mineral resources are used in providing education and healthcare, and none at all in depressing wages or preventing houses from being built. (And the high-priced vehicles being sold now pay for the R&D to improve the new technologies. The first portable computers and cell phones were ridiculously expensive toys for the rich, as well.)
otabdeveloper4 4y ago
Putting a metric ton of (what is essentially) rechargeable AA batteries into a car-shaped form factor is like strapping a jetpack to a horse. This is not the way of the future. The future will probably involve lots of electric transportation, but it won't look like this. (But judging by the electric transportation that people are actually buying right now, it will be much more personal and portable.)
- Tagbert 4y ago
  The batteries in EVs are nothing like AA batteries or even the lithium batteries in phones and laptops. The EV batteries are built more robustly with sophisticated charging systems and prevent them from overcharging to 100% or discharging to 0% (most indicated charge min and max are actually less to preserve battery health). They have active heating/cooling systems to keep the battlers within sustainable ranges. They are constructed of modules so if there are cell failures only that module needs to be replaced not the whole battery pack. Battery warranties are around 8-10 years and, while some have failed in the last 10 years or so, it is clear by now that most will last much longer than that.
  - otabdeveloper4 4y ago
    That's not the point. Nobody is casting doubt on the battery controller technology.
Bhilai 4y ago
BMW? Why makes you think they are caught with their pants down? BMW i4 is a fantastic EV and I think a lot of people would go for it instead of a Model3 which has a better range but pales in comparison when it comes to interiors, luxury and ride quality.
- _s 4y ago
  Adding to this - the i3 was a game changer in terms of materials and manufacturing. The i8 is still an excellent hybrid sports car - available long before the electrically boosted exotic cars were released. Lastly - I was happily driving an electric 1er convertible in Berlin under the DriveNow car share back in 2012! They’ve been in the EV game far longer than people realise; and have the iX1, i3, iX3, i4, i7, i8, iX either available now or within the next 12 months. This is not to gloss over their current subscription based hardware access, which is in poor taste, but obviously people are still buying their cars.
- rock_hard 4y ago
  Sales numbers disagree with you The Model3 outsells any BMW model by large margins
  - tmh88j 4y ago
    More sales doesn't mean better, especially considering BMW's offerings are newer. BMW is far superior to Tesla when it comes to the "car" part, as in the materials, build quality and driving dynamics. Same goes for the Taycan. The interior quality and NVH characteristics of a Model S might as well be that of a Corolla when compared to an equally expensive "traditional" luxury car like an S Class. Tesla's powertrains are phenomenal, everything else is mediocre at best. Most people don't know anything about cars and Tesla the default EV to them. I know so many people who never cared about cars suddenly willing to spend 2x the amount they previously did on a car because they want an EV and Tesla is all they know. Most don't know what a $75k+ interior should be, it's just fancier looking than their Hondas and Toyotas they've previously owned. Most don't seem to care about other brands nor are they interested in learning more, just as they felt about cars in general before owning an EV.
- 4y ago
faeriechangling 4y ago
Maybe that’s the optics but I’m inclined to believe him, the EV adoption plan relies on technology that doesn’t exist and the simplistic idea we take all the gas cars and replace them with electric cars I’m not convinced actually scales. I think we’re literally going to run out of the worlds natural resources before because we get even close to making enough EVs. I actually see a need to shift more people to not using cars as much or at all, and having those people walk/bike/transit. I also think lighter EVs such as scooters may be popular and they have ones with swappable batteries which work like swapping a propane tank. I also think the hybrids Toyota sells which require significantly less of certain resources will be appealing. Also finally telecommuting will be a big thing among white collar workers who won’t need anything more than a hybrid or light EV. My money is on Toyota being correct and is seeing gas cars being around for quite a lot longer than anticipated. I see the person of the future being less mobile. However technology is inherently unpredictable and advances in mining in particular could change this.
- BaculumMeumEst 4y ago
  > I think we’re literally going to run out of the worlds natural resources before because we get even close to making enough EVs. What are you expecting us to deplete from the planet in the next 30ish years?
  - bertil 4y ago
    Ice doesn’t go into EVs, but that one will be depleted within 30 years. Lithium is the most common element cited when that argument is raised: you can find trace amounts in seawater, so the total amount is enormous, but the extraction cost will make that an expensive process. If there are large desalinisation efforts (to get fresh water) Lithium could be captured in that context. Copper, in spite of being very abundant, might actually be a problem (if you include electricity transport lines). My assumption is that the ecological impact of cars will be too great and increasingly obviously so. People will switch to public transport and bicycles, including electric bikes. But all that is overlooking the tiny detail that half of humanity will have to move or die. That part is probably the key element of context people forget to include in their speculation.
davewritescode 4y ago
I wouldn’t put BMW in the same bucket as Toyota. BMW actually tried to sell electric cars and they just went too far selling an eco friendly car. The BMW i3 was the first mass produced carbon fiber chassis, was produced entirely with hydroelectric power, was made from a high percentage of recycled materials and had an optional 3 gallon take with a range extender as an option. I’m not convinced pure EV solutions are going to be the answer for everyone. The idea of smaller range EVs with range extenders still feels the most practical option for the next decade or two.
- ajmurmann 4y ago
  And they are releasing a great looking i4. A friend is even exchanging his M3 for one.
- senttoschool 4y ago
  What? Toyota has made plug-in hybrids that make much more sense economically than the i3.
  - davewritescode 4y ago
    If you get a chance, read more about how the i3 was produced. It was bigger than just building an electric car, it was about building cars sustainably while advancing some really cool tech. To this day, you won't find a carbon fiber chassis in anything under $250k. It was also neutered by US regulators who insisted that the "range extender" could only be used after depleting the battery which severely limits its utility. That's fixable with a $10 app. The i3 was fantastically cool it just turns out that most people aren't willing to compromise anything for a car that's built sustainably. That's why the i4 is doing much better than the i3 ever did.
    - senttoschool 4y ago
      I live in the real world. Toyota hybrids and plug-in hybrids have made a far bigger impact.
torginus 4y ago
Most people can be often wrong. As for EVs, I don't think there's much development to be done, save for batteries - the powertrains are dead simple, and we have been building electric motors for longer than ICEs. And the thing with battery technologies is that there is quite a bit of stagnation as there has been very little improvement in power density - higher densities, and safer chemistries that can do more cycles are still the subjects of research, and it's still a question of 'if' and not 'when' that a given promising technology (like solid state batteries) will pan out. There are multiple solutions - plug-in hybrids, which Toyota makes can almost match EVs for emissions for a lot of people. I, for example commute about 30km per day, and take longer trips only every 2 weeks or so, and well made ICE engines have such a low emission for long trips that combined with the rarity of use, make their environmental impact negligible.

by llampx 4y ago

awer897tyaiurfh 4y ago

resoluteteeth 4y ago

Toyota has phevs (plug-in hybrids) that can run fully off of the battery. They have gotten a lot of shit over the past year for arguing that these should be incentivized by the government in addition to full electric vehicles, but I think there is some merit to their position. Right now a lot of people who buy electric cars are wealthier people who also own other cars. This is not inherently bad and, for example, if a household that is going to own multiple cars either way chooses to make one of those electric it may be a win for the environment, but if people are buying extra cars because they are excited about electric cars but also need a conventional car when they go longer distances, that may not actually be that great. Until there are sufficient charger networks everywhere, it might actually be better to incentives phevs to build up the infrastructure and ensure that people who can only afford to own one car but need to travel longer distances can still use electricity for shorter trips in the form of phevs rather than continuing to use conventional cars. It's not completely clear if EV adoption will continue to accelerate or if it's going to hit limits when we run out of people who can easily switch. Toyota may have a point in that the current timetable for full adoption of evs may be unrealistic, and if it is, it might be better to compromise slightly more if it makes it easier to build up the infrastructure on a more realistic timetable rather than risk hitting a wall If we set the goal as 100% of vehicles being EVs in a relatively short amount of time, we're going to run into problems who are currently unable to use EVs because of the lack of a fast charger network. (In reality, battery swapping would probably make sense for longer trips once everyone is using evs, but there is zero infrastructure for that right now.) That said, another issue with electric cars in general is that for the type of short trip where they make the most sense, it might arguably be better for the environment to focus on electric public transportation when possible anyway (especially non-battery-powered street cars and light rail which aren't affected by supply of some of the elements required for batteries). Also, if we can't hit the targets for EV adoption we may have difficulty hitting environmental goals in general.

MerelyMortal 4y ago
Doomberg has a position that I agree with: It's better for 6 or 7 plug-in hybrids to be developed using the same amount of batteries materials it would take to make one fully-electric vehicle. Most people make short-range daily trips each day, and they could probably do 100% on the battery of a hybrid. The gas portion would kick-in when they do an occassional longer trip. No significant change to infrastructure would be required, and gasoline use would go down dramatically as most people would be using the smaller battery most of the time, and adoption would be way faster than fully-electric.
- CameronNemo 4y ago
  The Prius Prime (PHEV) maxes out at 25 miles of electric range. And that is under optimal conditions. The average daily commute is longer than that.
  - mlyle 4y ago
    I have a Honda Clarity. 48 mile range, though I only charge it to 90%. I've gone 15,000 miles now on about 30 gallons of gas. I keep trying to get over "500 miles to the gallon" but that's a limit I have a hard time surpassing: occasional long trips or forgetting to charge does me in. (Not to mention the car will occasionally burn gas on its own just to confirm the engine is in good working order). It seems like it would be a waste for me to have a 200-300 mile range and no engine. The longest trips would still have been less convenient. And you could build 4-7 cars like mine with the same battery resources.
    - ok_dad 4y ago
      Ideally one could configure their hybrid car with different battery to gas tank ratios when they buy it, or perhaps even for a fee after purchase.
      - mlyle 4y ago
        Gas tanks are small and light compared to batteries and engines. It all comes down to how much battery you want, and whether you want an engine.

tomohawk 4y ago

I think you've hit on something here. In this day when what is seen on social media is all that matters, practical engineering and science concerns definitely take a back seat. But there's another explanation for why Toyota does not have an EV lineup - they have been pursuing hybrid, hydrogen, and other tech for years. They have a long term vision instead of one that is just based on what is in social media or on what politicians have suddenly decided to subsidize. Since when is ground truth found on social media or from politicians? It remains to be seen who will be caught out. It also seems nonsensical to place all our eggs in the EV basket.

XorNot 4y ago
The other interpretation is that their solid state battery technology is taking a long time to commercialize and meanwhile all their competitors have products in the market: https://www.drive.com.au/news/toyota-hybrids-to-adopt-solid-state-battery-tech-by-2025-report/ https://www.drive.com.au/news/toyota-hybrids-to-adopt-solid-...

spacehunt 4y ago

Don't they have the bZ4X? Granted it's only one model, but still it's one more than "doesn't have any EVs".

CameronNemo 4y ago
That is a 2023 vehicle AIUI.
- spacehunt 4y ago
  They issued one recall already, so I assumed at least some are in customers' hands?
  - mint2 4y ago
    you mean parked useless into their garages. Their wheels literally fall off and they are not supposed to drive them. Toyota offered to buy back all of them.

ddoolin 4y ago

I agree Toyota doesn't have very appealing vehicles, but they were the best-selling manufacturer for one Q last year and they've been #2 only to GM for quite some time. Given what happened during COVID supply issues, I'd say they're the ones stealing lunches.

7speter 4y ago
They don’t have appeal? Only if you want to become friends with your mechanic.
- ddoolin 4y ago
  Touché. I just meant (mostly) looks and feature-wise.

TheLoafOfBread 4y ago

Toyota is probably only company who understands that poor people can't afford BEVs and will be left behind. And introducing another EV Hummer or Cybertruck for 100k USD won't really help them to get affordable EV. I am convinced that BEV are not the future, because there is not enough of material, especially there is not enough copper. Assoc Prof Simon Michaux on shortage of copper https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBVmnKuBocc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBVmnKuBocc https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/14/copper-is-key-to-electric-vehicles-wind-and-solar-power-were-short-supply.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/14/copper-is-key-to-electric-ve...

tuatoru 4y ago
Michaux takes a long time to get to the point, even at double speed. None of what I have heard in the first 20 minutes is new to anyone who followed the Peak Oil debate back in the 2005-2009 period. His estimate of required battery capacity for short-distance and light vehicles, around 62 TWh, matches a quick back-of-the envelope calculation, so that's good. The description for the video is unpromising, blurring the distinction between reserves (known, characterized, owned) and resources (varying degrees of knowness, characterization, unowned), and implying we face a binary situation: plenty of resources, and then nothing. The world is not like that. There is always a spectrum of possibilities. We have an extremely abundant adequate substitute for copper for electrical uses: aluminum. The bulk of electrical distribution systems is steel-cored aluminum wire. Is copper better? Yes. Is it so much better than aluminum that the latter is unusable? No. Aluminum's lower electrical and thermal conductivities will require design changes (higher voltage, lower current), and overall efficiency won't be as good as with copper. Very sad. But aluminum is still perfectly usable for EV motors. And there are ways to eke out the copper we have, such as copper-clad aluminum wire (CCAW), which is already extensively used in loudspeakers. Some high currents flow in subwoofer voice coils. As for poor people being left behind, resource prices are not the cause. Very few mineral resources are used in providing education and healthcare, and none at all in depressing wages or preventing houses from being built. (And the high-priced vehicles being sold now pay for the R&D to improve the new technologies. The first portable computers and cell phones were ridiculously expensive toys for the rich, as well.)

otabdeveloper4 4y ago

Putting a metric ton of (what is essentially) rechargeable AA batteries into a car-shaped form factor is like strapping a jetpack to a horse. This is not the way of the future. The future will probably involve lots of electric transportation, but it won't look like this. (But judging by the electric transportation that people are actually buying right now, it will be much more personal and portable.)

Tagbert 4y ago
The batteries in EVs are nothing like AA batteries or even the lithium batteries in phones and laptops. The EV batteries are built more robustly with sophisticated charging systems and prevent them from overcharging to 100% or discharging to 0% (most indicated charge min and max are actually less to preserve battery health). They have active heating/cooling systems to keep the battlers within sustainable ranges. They are constructed of modules so if there are cell failures only that module needs to be replaced not the whole battery pack. Battery warranties are around 8-10 years and, while some have failed in the last 10 years or so, it is clear by now that most will last much longer than that.
- otabdeveloper4 4y ago
  That's not the point. Nobody is casting doubt on the battery controller technology.

Bhilai 4y ago

BMW? Why makes you think they are caught with their pants down? BMW i4 is a fantastic EV and I think a lot of people would go for it instead of a Model3 which has a better range but pales in comparison when it comes to interiors, luxury and ride quality.

_s 4y ago
Adding to this - the i3 was a game changer in terms of materials and manufacturing. The i8 is still an excellent hybrid sports car - available long before the electrically boosted exotic cars were released. Lastly - I was happily driving an electric 1er convertible in Berlin under the DriveNow car share back in 2012! They’ve been in the EV game far longer than people realise; and have the iX1, i3, iX3, i4, i7, i8, iX either available now or within the next 12 months. This is not to gloss over their current subscription based hardware access, which is in poor taste, but obviously people are still buying their cars.
rock_hard 4y ago
Sales numbers disagree with you The Model3 outsells any BMW model by large margins
- tmh88j 4y ago
  More sales doesn't mean better, especially considering BMW's offerings are newer. BMW is far superior to Tesla when it comes to the "car" part, as in the materials, build quality and driving dynamics. Same goes for the Taycan. The interior quality and NVH characteristics of a Model S might as well be that of a Corolla when compared to an equally expensive "traditional" luxury car like an S Class. Tesla's powertrains are phenomenal, everything else is mediocre at best. Most people don't know anything about cars and Tesla the default EV to them. I know so many people who never cared about cars suddenly willing to spend 2x the amount they previously did on a car because they want an EV and Tesla is all they know. Most don't know what a $75k+ interior should be, it's just fancier looking than their Hondas and Toyotas they've previously owned. Most don't seem to care about other brands nor are they interested in learning more, just as they felt about cars in general before owning an EV.
4y ago

faeriechangling 4y ago

Maybe that’s the optics but I’m inclined to believe him, the EV adoption plan relies on technology that doesn’t exist and the simplistic idea we take all the gas cars and replace them with electric cars I’m not convinced actually scales. I think we’re literally going to run out of the worlds natural resources before because we get even close to making enough EVs. I actually see a need to shift more people to not using cars as much or at all, and having those people walk/bike/transit. I also think lighter EVs such as scooters may be popular and they have ones with swappable batteries which work like swapping a propane tank. I also think the hybrids Toyota sells which require significantly less of certain resources will be appealing. Also finally telecommuting will be a big thing among white collar workers who won’t need anything more than a hybrid or light EV. My money is on Toyota being correct and is seeing gas cars being around for quite a lot longer than anticipated. I see the person of the future being less mobile. However technology is inherently unpredictable and advances in mining in particular could change this.

BaculumMeumEst 4y ago
> I think we’re literally going to run out of the worlds natural resources before because we get even close to making enough EVs. What are you expecting us to deplete from the planet in the next 30ish years?
- bertil 4y ago
  Ice doesn’t go into EVs, but that one will be depleted within 30 years. Lithium is the most common element cited when that argument is raised: you can find trace amounts in seawater, so the total amount is enormous, but the extraction cost will make that an expensive process. If there are large desalinisation efforts (to get fresh water) Lithium could be captured in that context. Copper, in spite of being very abundant, might actually be a problem (if you include electricity transport lines). My assumption is that the ecological impact of cars will be too great and increasingly obviously so. People will switch to public transport and bicycles, including electric bikes. But all that is overlooking the tiny detail that half of humanity will have to move or die. That part is probably the key element of context people forget to include in their speculation.

davewritescode 4y ago

I wouldn’t put BMW in the same bucket as Toyota. BMW actually tried to sell electric cars and they just went too far selling an eco friendly car. The BMW i3 was the first mass produced carbon fiber chassis, was produced entirely with hydroelectric power, was made from a high percentage of recycled materials and had an optional 3 gallon take with a range extender as an option. I’m not convinced pure EV solutions are going to be the answer for everyone. The idea of smaller range EVs with range extenders still feels the most practical option for the next decade or two.

ajmurmann 4y ago
And they are releasing a great looking i4. A friend is even exchanging his M3 for one.
senttoschool 4y ago
What? Toyota has made plug-in hybrids that make much more sense economically than the i3.
- davewritescode 4y ago
  If you get a chance, read more about how the i3 was produced. It was bigger than just building an electric car, it was about building cars sustainably while advancing some really cool tech. To this day, you won't find a carbon fiber chassis in anything under $250k. It was also neutered by US regulators who insisted that the "range extender" could only be used after depleting the battery which severely limits its utility. That's fixable with a $10 app. The i3 was fantastically cool it just turns out that most people aren't willing to compromise anything for a car that's built sustainably. That's why the i4 is doing much better than the i3 ever did.
  - senttoschool 4y ago
    I live in the real world. Toyota hybrids and plug-in hybrids have made a far bigger impact.

torginus 4y ago

Most people can be often wrong. As for EVs, I don't think there's much development to be done, save for batteries - the powertrains are dead simple, and we have been building electric motors for longer than ICEs. And the thing with battery technologies is that there is quite a bit of stagnation as there has been very little improvement in power density - higher densities, and safer chemistries that can do more cycles are still the subjects of research, and it's still a question of 'if' and not 'when' that a given promising technology (like solid state batteries) will pan out. There are multiple solutions - plug-in hybrids, which Toyota makes can almost match EVs for emissions for a lot of people. I, for example commute about 30km per day, and take longer trips only every 2 weeks or so, and well made ICE engines have such a low emission for long trips that combined with the rarity of use, make their environmental impact negligible.