8 ms·

Toyota reduces price of new hydrogen car with $15,000 of free fuel

33 points by namanyayg 2y ago

markus_zhang 2y ago
I'm not sure how safe a hydrogen car is...any insight?
- pfdietz 2y ago
  It's certainly not safe from buyer's remorse. One sees videos of customers who rate a Mirai purchase as the worst purchase they have ever made. Also, Toyota is being sued. Basically, physical safety is a nonissue if the purchase makes no sense anyway.
- anenefan 2y ago
  I don't know if the original article was complete or just the little text I saw was because of the lousy render due to my older browser. Anyhow [1] reads a lot better as well as probably being an earlier article about the same - presently has 74 comments including at least one from a person who brought two for company vehicles. As for safe, I would say just as safe if not safer than the vehicles fitted to run on LPG or natural gas due to what I would presume would be an overkill of engineering and materials used, ensuing the lines don't leak even if the vehicle was involved in a minor fencer bender. I have worked with hydrogen on and off over a few years (mostly as gas to run a welding torch) and despite tales how it might just explode or catch fire if one looked at it the wrong way, it's actually pretty uneventful most of the time - it's just hard to see the flame ... and yes, being curious I've done things like igniting a big plastic bag filled with it to see what it does - meh. [1] https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1145539_this-new-toyota-includes-15-000-of-free-fuel-costs-as-little-as-17-000 https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1145539_this-new-toyota...
- basementcat 2y ago
  I drove one for several years and had no safety issues. Access to fuel is the critical issue and all my driving during that period was limited to areas between or within range of H2 fuel stations. The vehicle handled similar to an electric vehicle except with about a 5 minute "recharging" time.
  - danans 2y ago
    > The vehicle handled similar to an electric vehicle except with about 5 minute "recharging". This is because from the perspective of just the drivetrain, it is an electric vehicle, battery and all (albeit a smaller one).
    - seanmcdirmid 2y ago
      Does the fuel cell charge a battery that then goes to the drive train or does the fuel cell’s electricity output go straight to the drive train?
      - basementcat 2y ago
        It charges a battery.
      - stephenr 2y ago
        It has a 1.2kWh battery that's listed as "drive battery", my understanding is that the fuel cell is just providing charge to the battery.
        seanmcdirmid 2y ago
        Thanks. Different from those diesel turbine hybrid electric locomotives then.
- Hamuko 2y ago
  It's definitely not safe if you suffer from range anxiety. Good luck finding that H2 station.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > not safe if you suffer from range anxiety I'm increasingly convinced this is a generational thing. I typically run my car until close to empty unless I'm planning on leaving town. I've had houseguests, on the other hand, who start literally flipping out if the tank goes below a quarter full. (There is no practically conceivable case where running out of gas in town would constitute an emergency.)
    - diggan 2y ago
      > I'm increasingly convinced this is a generational thing Begs the question, what generation are you part of then? I'm millennial I guess (born early 90s), and I also try to keep my tank somewhat topped up in case I have to go somewhere quickly were I wouldn't have time to hunt down a gas-station to refill at on the way. I wouldn't flip out if it wasn't though, and plenty of times my tank been close to empty before taking my ass to a gas-station, just the general idea to keep the tank somewhat non-empty.
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > what generation are you part of then? Millenial, too. The generations I observed this in are X to Boomer. What I'm getting at is the anxiety part of tank/range anxiety more than the behaviour. Like, if we're going to the supermarket (2 miles away), are on a time budget, the car has 50+ miles of gas in it, and there are multiple stations a mile away, filling up isn't a priority.
        macintux 2y ago
        There are, however, reasons why allowing the tank to drop near empty is problematic completely independent of range anxiety. Cold weather can freeze condensation in the tank. A dirty tank can clog up the gas filter.
cjbenedikt 2y ago
https://www.nrdc.org/bio/christian-tae/hydrogen-safety-lets-clear-air#:~:text=Hydrogen%20safety%20standards%20have%20come%20a%20long%20way&text=Years%20of%20R&D%20and%20experience,decarbonize%20our%20future%20energy%20needs https://www.nrdc.org/bio/christian-tae/hydrogen-safety-lets-....
kotaKat 2y ago
For those of you really thinking about this, here's the current status of hydrogen fueling stations in California: https://h2-ca.com/ https://h2-ca.com/ Out of 65 stations in the state, only 33 currently have fuel and are known "online". Good luck!
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > Out of 65 stations in the state, only 33 currently have fuel and are known "online" Hydrogen cars are the worst of all worlds. You still have to overhaul your production and distribution infrastructure. But you keep the complicated power train and time suck of tank-filling from ICE vehicles.
  - sambull 2y ago
    but you get to keep a distribution infrastructure. I think that's the goal. They still want the 'fuel' company in the middle.
    - AnotherGoodName 2y ago
      I think it’s even more sinister honestly. It’s trivial to make synthetic methane today (basically the exact same process as synthetic hydrogen - electrolysis of water but in presence of co2 and a catalyst will make methane instead) and that’s a very common fuel source with a functioning distribution network already. So if the goal is to make green fuel why not just use supply the existing natural gas network with synthetically produced fuel? Why go to great lengths to ship and store hydrogen that’s really really hard to work with in so many ways? I think the answer is that there’s no intention of hydrogen being actually a green fuel source. It’s just going to be made from cracking hydrocarbons but it’s branding as green will obfuscate that. If they wanted to make fuel from electricity which is the implied promise of hydrogen they’d do that already. But they don’t. There’s absolutely no intention of being green here.
      - bryanlarsen 2y ago
        It's because synthetic methane makes no sense economically. Similarly Hydrogen doesn't make any sense economically either, but because it's much more hypothetical the concerns can be hand waved away. Not so with synthetic methane.
jmclnx 2y ago
First I think this is a promising product and I would consider this except for 2 issues: 1. Fueling Stations. 2. A more complex concern. From what I understand its "exhaust" is water, which is great. But where I live, winters could be a big issue. These vehicles could coat the roads with thin black ice. So, if true, would that mean this product would only be useful in warm climates ?
- jryb 2y ago
  They emit water vapor, not liquid water. Gasoline-fueled cars emit roughly the same amount of water as a hydrogen-powered vehicle, so we already know this isn't an issue.
  - garciasn 2y ago
    It’s an issue here in Minnesota; intersections and highways where there’s standing traffic are slick from the freezing exhaust condensate, but, to clarify your statement: it potentially wouldn’t be a bigger issue than it already is.
  - diggan 2y ago
    > They emit water vapor, not liquid water If cold enough, doesn't that just freeze and fall to the ground anyways? Considering some places have between like -30/-20C in the winters.
- Ekaros 2y ago
  Have you ever looked at tail pipe of car in freezing weather? Most of that is water vapor. Some fraction is particulate emissions, but most of it is vapor. Mostly don't see this in summer. But cars have been for century produced water as exhaust with no issues. Water from hydrogen is really not that different.
- FractalParadigm 2y ago
  > But where I live, winters could be a big issue. These vehicles could coat the roads with thin black ice. I never even considered this as a problem. Is the exhaust liquid water though? Because my understanding of the process is such that is still creates an appreciable amount of heat, causing the exhaust to leave as a vapour (much in the same way water vapour is already expelled from catalyzed ICE exhaust, or people breathing).
dagmx 2y ago
This has to be Toyota’s biggest and weirdest hang up. The insistence that hydrogen cars are a viable future, and the lobbying against full BEV just feels like they’re constantly digging their heels in on something that they can’t actually prove in the market in any meaningful way. The state of hydrogen refueling alone is awful. Transporting it, storing it and maintaining the stations is awful. Convenience versus electric for home charging is awful. Toyota really haven’t provided a meaningful argument for why this is the best route beyond just the cost of making the BEVs
- nicce 2y ago
  > Toyota really haven’t provided a meaningful argument for why this is the best route beyond just the cost of making the BEVs Does it really need one? It is not possible in theory to replace all traditional cars with electric cars with the current battery technology. There isn't enough materials on the planet. Currently it is just luxury for the wealthiest, if we look the global level.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > it is not possible in theory to replace all traditional cars with electric cars with the current battery technology. There isn't enough materials on the planet This is not true [1]. And that estimate assumes battery chemistries don't change (or vary), which is also obviously nonsense. [1] https://www.sustainabilitybynumbers.com/p/lithium-electric-vehicles https://www.sustainabilitybynumbers.com/p/lithium-electric-v...
  - danans 2y ago
    > Currently it is just luxury for the wealthiest, if we look the global level. Today, in the developing world, traditional and highly polluting 2-stroke engine powered tuk tuks, driven by quite poor people, are being replaced by electric versions. I asked one such driver recently why he went electric. He said it was cheaper to operate.
    - djtango 2y ago
ajb 2y ago
The funny thing is that theoretically hydrogen would be easy to deploy in the UK. We already have a gas network for methane, it wouldn't be hard to mix in 20% hydrogen and then filter it back out at the other end (there's an energy cost, but it's not huge, and in any case most existing uses would not have a problem with 20% hydrogen). Which would give us the ability to deliver hydrogen relatively cheaply to any location. But it looks like EVs have too much momentum, and are likely to have a cheaper running cost anyway.
- danans 2y ago
  > We already have a gas network for methane, it wouldn't be hard to mix in 20% hydrogen and then filter it back out at the other end (there's an energy cost, but it's not huge, and in any case most existing uses would not have a problem with 20% hydrogen). Even ignoring the dangers of embrittlement of metal pipes that carry the hydrogen enriched gas, what is the cost of this methane/hydrogen filter, and what is it's safety for home use given that it's dealing with 2 highly flammable gases mixed together. I can't find anything online about household methane/hydrogen separators. Whereas an EVSE is basically just a big electrical switch.
  - ajb 2y ago
    The UK gas network was used for many decades to transport a 50-50 mix of hydrogen and CO, called "town gas". Nevertheless the risk to the modern network should be diligently evaluated . I believe the intention is to do that anyway to the extent it is found to be safe, as blending in hydrogen reduces the carbon consumption of the gas network For papers on hydrogen/methane separation, see: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=blended+natural+gas+hydrogen+separation&oq=hydrogen+extraction+from+blended+gas https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=blen...
    - AnotherGoodName 2y ago
      Qq where did this hydrogen come from for the 50-50 mix? From a quick reading above it looks like it came from cracking fossil fuels rather than electrolysis which is understandable but I think that should be made clear to everyone. It’s really just another way to ship fossil fuels in that sense. Burns slightly cleaner on your stove is the only real advantage here.
GregDavidson 2y ago
I keep hoping that the amazing engineering feats going into this boondoggle will be applied to applications where hydrogen is visble, e.g. larger vehicles.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > where hydrogen is visble, e.g. larger vehicles Could you outline which vehicles these are? I've never seen a case where hydrogen makes sense for any reason other than trying to make hydrogen make sense.
- GregDavidson 2y ago
  Oops: s/visible/viable/ Hydrogen fuel cells make more sense for aircraft (weight) and larger vehicles like trucks because of scaling (larger tanks are more efficient, etc.) and fleet advantages (depot refueling). It is amazing to me that Toyota has gotten hydrogen to work in cars, but it can't compete with batteries.
instagib 2y ago
How much copper is needed to electrify the US car industry? -The mining industry is slow and long-term oriented, and can't keep up with the increasing demand for copper. -It would take more than twice as much copper to electrify the US as has been mined in all of human history up to 2018 -It would take decades to build new mines, and copper mining is expensive
- tzs 2y ago
  I'm having trouble seeing how it would take more copper than has been mined throughout all history up to 2018. First, there would be the copper needed in the actual cars. A BEV uses about 80 kg of copper (compared to around 20 for an ICE). At 15.5 million cars and light trucks sold per year in the US that's 1.2 million metric tons of copper per year. World copper production is 22 million metric tons per year, so 5% of world copper production. Then there would be any copper needed for any upgrades to the electrical distribution system. Working out from the home, level 2 EV charging draws about the same amount of power as an electric clothes dryer. Most home electrical systems are already designed to handle the load of a clothes dryer running during the day when households are also using their other electrical appliances. They should have no trouble with someone charging their EV overnight (which electric companies will encourage with lower overnight rates). The key here is that in most cases EV charging at home won't increase the peak load. It will just raise the average load. So no need for new wiring. The same should be true of most of the electrical distribution infrastructure in cities. Maybe we'll need to build more transmission lines between cities and regions. But those are usually made of aluminum, not copper. Copper is more conductive than aluminum so to make an aluminum wire with the same capacity it was to have a cross section about 56% bigger, so your wire has 56% more aluminum by volume. But copper is way denser than aluminum (8.96 g/cm^3 vs 2.7 g/cm^3) so the aluminum wire is only 47% as heavy as the copper wire. For lines that are not buried that means your supports only have to be half as strong, lowering their costs. Aluminum is also a lot cheaper ($2.57/kg vs $9.50/kg) so the aluminum wire is only about 13% of the cost of the copper wire. That's a huge win even with buried lines. What else would be needed that would use copper?
  - pfdietz 2y ago
johnea 2y ago
Wow, the Japanese auto makers are pretty frikin desperate to avoid electrification 8-( It's clear they don't want to give up the dominance in mechanical engineering that is manifest in their internal combustion engines. I just wonder why they haven't more significantly emphasized plug-in hybrids. Just multiplying the battery capacity of a Prius, and letting it plug in would be a huge entry into low cost electrification that would still leverage their mechanical dominance in the industry (read as: greatest longevity by far). What up Mr. Toyoda?

33 points by namanyayg 2y ago

markus_zhang 2y ago

I'm not sure how safe a hydrogen car is...any insight?

pfdietz 2y ago
It's certainly not safe from buyer's remorse. One sees videos of customers who rate a Mirai purchase as the worst purchase they have ever made. Also, Toyota is being sued. Basically, physical safety is a nonissue if the purchase makes no sense anyway.
anenefan 2y ago
I don't know if the original article was complete or just the little text I saw was because of the lousy render due to my older browser. Anyhow [1] reads a lot better as well as probably being an earlier article about the same - presently has 74 comments including at least one from a person who brought two for company vehicles. As for safe, I would say just as safe if not safer than the vehicles fitted to run on LPG or natural gas due to what I would presume would be an overkill of engineering and materials used, ensuing the lines don't leak even if the vehicle was involved in a minor fencer bender. I have worked with hydrogen on and off over a few years (mostly as gas to run a welding torch) and despite tales how it might just explode or catch fire if one looked at it the wrong way, it's actually pretty uneventful most of the time - it's just hard to see the flame ... and yes, being curious I've done things like igniting a big plastic bag filled with it to see what it does - meh. [1] https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1145539_this-new-toyota-includes-15-000-of-free-fuel-costs-as-little-as-17-000 https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1145539_this-new-toyota...
basementcat 2y ago
I drove one for several years and had no safety issues. Access to fuel is the critical issue and all my driving during that period was limited to areas between or within range of H2 fuel stations. The vehicle handled similar to an electric vehicle except with about a 5 minute "recharging" time.
- danans 2y ago
  > The vehicle handled similar to an electric vehicle except with about 5 minute "recharging". This is because from the perspective of just the drivetrain, it is an electric vehicle, battery and all (albeit a smaller one).
  - seanmcdirmid 2y ago
    Does the fuel cell charge a battery that then goes to the drive train or does the fuel cell’s electricity output go straight to the drive train?
    - basementcat 2y ago
      It charges a battery.
    - stephenr 2y ago
      It has a 1.2kWh battery that's listed as "drive battery", my understanding is that the fuel cell is just providing charge to the battery.
      - seanmcdirmid 2y ago
        Thanks. Different from those diesel turbine hybrid electric locomotives then.
Hamuko 2y ago
It's definitely not safe if you suffer from range anxiety. Good luck finding that H2 station.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > not safe if you suffer from range anxiety I'm increasingly convinced this is a generational thing. I typically run my car until close to empty unless I'm planning on leaving town. I've had houseguests, on the other hand, who start literally flipping out if the tank goes below a quarter full. (There is no practically conceivable case where running out of gas in town would constitute an emergency.)
  - diggan 2y ago
    > I'm increasingly convinced this is a generational thing Begs the question, what generation are you part of then? I'm millennial I guess (born early 90s), and I also try to keep my tank somewhat topped up in case I have to go somewhere quickly were I wouldn't have time to hunt down a gas-station to refill at on the way. I wouldn't flip out if it wasn't though, and plenty of times my tank been close to empty before taking my ass to a gas-station, just the general idea to keep the tank somewhat non-empty.
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > what generation are you part of then? Millenial, too. The generations I observed this in are X to Boomer. What I'm getting at is the anxiety part of tank/range anxiety more than the behaviour. Like, if we're going to the supermarket (2 miles away), are on a time budget, the car has 50+ miles of gas in it, and there are multiple stations a mile away, filling up isn't a priority.
      - macintux 2y ago
        There are, however, reasons why allowing the tank to drop near empty is problematic completely independent of range anxiety. Cold weather can freeze condensation in the tank. A dirty tank can clog up the gas filter.

cjbenedikt 2y ago

https://www.nrdc.org/bio/christian-tae/hydrogen-safety-lets-clear-air#:~:text=Hydrogen%20safety%20standards%20have%20come%20a%20long%20way&text=Years%20of%20R&D%20and%20experience,decarbonize%20our%20future%20energy%20needs https://www.nrdc.org/bio/christian-tae/hydrogen-safety-lets-....

kotaKat 2y ago

For those of you really thinking about this, here's the current status of hydrogen fueling stations in California: https://h2-ca.com/ https://h2-ca.com/ Out of 65 stations in the state, only 33 currently have fuel and are known "online". Good luck!

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> Out of 65 stations in the state, only 33 currently have fuel and are known "online" Hydrogen cars are the worst of all worlds. You still have to overhaul your production and distribution infrastructure. But you keep the complicated power train and time suck of tank-filling from ICE vehicles.
- sambull 2y ago
  but you get to keep a distribution infrastructure. I think that's the goal. They still want the 'fuel' company in the middle.
  - AnotherGoodName 2y ago
    I think it’s even more sinister honestly. It’s trivial to make synthetic methane today (basically the exact same process as synthetic hydrogen - electrolysis of water but in presence of co2 and a catalyst will make methane instead) and that’s a very common fuel source with a functioning distribution network already. So if the goal is to make green fuel why not just use supply the existing natural gas network with synthetically produced fuel? Why go to great lengths to ship and store hydrogen that’s really really hard to work with in so many ways? I think the answer is that there’s no intention of hydrogen being actually a green fuel source. It’s just going to be made from cracking hydrocarbons but it’s branding as green will obfuscate that. If they wanted to make fuel from electricity which is the implied promise of hydrogen they’d do that already. But they don’t. There’s absolutely no intention of being green here.
    - bryanlarsen 2y ago
      It's because synthetic methane makes no sense economically. Similarly Hydrogen doesn't make any sense economically either, but because it's much more hypothetical the concerns can be hand waved away. Not so with synthetic methane.

jmclnx 2y ago

First I think this is a promising product and I would consider this except for 2 issues: 1. Fueling Stations. 2. A more complex concern. From what I understand its "exhaust" is water, which is great. But where I live, winters could be a big issue. These vehicles could coat the roads with thin black ice. So, if true, would that mean this product would only be useful in warm climates ?

jryb 2y ago
They emit water vapor, not liquid water. Gasoline-fueled cars emit roughly the same amount of water as a hydrogen-powered vehicle, so we already know this isn't an issue.
- garciasn 2y ago
  It’s an issue here in Minnesota; intersections and highways where there’s standing traffic are slick from the freezing exhaust condensate, but, to clarify your statement: it potentially wouldn’t be a bigger issue than it already is.
- diggan 2y ago
  > They emit water vapor, not liquid water If cold enough, doesn't that just freeze and fall to the ground anyways? Considering some places have between like -30/-20C in the winters.
Ekaros 2y ago
Have you ever looked at tail pipe of car in freezing weather? Most of that is water vapor. Some fraction is particulate emissions, but most of it is vapor. Mostly don't see this in summer. But cars have been for century produced water as exhaust with no issues. Water from hydrogen is really not that different.
FractalParadigm 2y ago
> But where I live, winters could be a big issue. These vehicles could coat the roads with thin black ice. I never even considered this as a problem. Is the exhaust liquid water though? Because my understanding of the process is such that is still creates an appreciable amount of heat, causing the exhaust to leave as a vapour (much in the same way water vapour is already expelled from catalyzed ICE exhaust, or people breathing).

dagmx 2y ago

This has to be Toyota’s biggest and weirdest hang up. The insistence that hydrogen cars are a viable future, and the lobbying against full BEV just feels like they’re constantly digging their heels in on something that they can’t actually prove in the market in any meaningful way. The state of hydrogen refueling alone is awful. Transporting it, storing it and maintaining the stations is awful. Convenience versus electric for home charging is awful. Toyota really haven’t provided a meaningful argument for why this is the best route beyond just the cost of making the BEVs

nicce 2y ago
> Toyota really haven’t provided a meaningful argument for why this is the best route beyond just the cost of making the BEVs Does it really need one? It is not possible in theory to replace all traditional cars with electric cars with the current battery technology. There isn't enough materials on the planet. Currently it is just luxury for the wealthiest, if we look the global level.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > it is not possible in theory to replace all traditional cars with electric cars with the current battery technology. There isn't enough materials on the planet This is not true [1]. And that estimate assumes battery chemistries don't change (or vary), which is also obviously nonsense. [1] https://www.sustainabilitybynumbers.com/p/lithium-electric-vehicles https://www.sustainabilitybynumbers.com/p/lithium-electric-v...
- danans 2y ago
  > Currently it is just luxury for the wealthiest, if we look the global level. Today, in the developing world, traditional and highly polluting 2-stroke engine powered tuk tuks, driven by quite poor people, are being replaced by electric versions. I asked one such driver recently why he went electric. He said it was cheaper to operate.
  - djtango 2y ago

ajb 2y ago

The funny thing is that theoretically hydrogen would be easy to deploy in the UK. We already have a gas network for methane, it wouldn't be hard to mix in 20% hydrogen and then filter it back out at the other end (there's an energy cost, but it's not huge, and in any case most existing uses would not have a problem with 20% hydrogen). Which would give us the ability to deliver hydrogen relatively cheaply to any location. But it looks like EVs have too much momentum, and are likely to have a cheaper running cost anyway.

danans 2y ago
> We already have a gas network for methane, it wouldn't be hard to mix in 20% hydrogen and then filter it back out at the other end (there's an energy cost, but it's not huge, and in any case most existing uses would not have a problem with 20% hydrogen). Even ignoring the dangers of embrittlement of metal pipes that carry the hydrogen enriched gas, what is the cost of this methane/hydrogen filter, and what is it's safety for home use given that it's dealing with 2 highly flammable gases mixed together. I can't find anything online about household methane/hydrogen separators. Whereas an EVSE is basically just a big electrical switch.
- ajb 2y ago
  The UK gas network was used for many decades to transport a 50-50 mix of hydrogen and CO, called "town gas". Nevertheless the risk to the modern network should be diligently evaluated . I believe the intention is to do that anyway to the extent it is found to be safe, as blending in hydrogen reduces the carbon consumption of the gas network For papers on hydrogen/methane separation, see: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=blended+natural+gas+hydrogen+separation&oq=hydrogen+extraction+from+blended+gas https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=blen...
  - AnotherGoodName 2y ago
    Qq where did this hydrogen come from for the 50-50 mix? From a quick reading above it looks like it came from cracking fossil fuels rather than electrolysis which is understandable but I think that should be made clear to everyone. It’s really just another way to ship fossil fuels in that sense. Burns slightly cleaner on your stove is the only real advantage here.

GregDavidson 2y ago

I keep hoping that the amazing engineering feats going into this boondoggle will be applied to applications where hydrogen is visble, e.g. larger vehicles.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> where hydrogen is visble, e.g. larger vehicles Could you outline which vehicles these are? I've never seen a case where hydrogen makes sense for any reason other than trying to make hydrogen make sense.
GregDavidson 2y ago
Oops: s/visible/viable/ Hydrogen fuel cells make more sense for aircraft (weight) and larger vehicles like trucks because of scaling (larger tanks are more efficient, etc.) and fleet advantages (depot refueling). It is amazing to me that Toyota has gotten hydrogen to work in cars, but it can't compete with batteries.

instagib 2y ago

How much copper is needed to electrify the US car industry? -The mining industry is slow and long-term oriented, and can't keep up with the increasing demand for copper. -It would take more than twice as much copper to electrify the US as has been mined in all of human history up to 2018 -It would take decades to build new mines, and copper mining is expensive

tzs 2y ago
I'm having trouble seeing how it would take more copper than has been mined throughout all history up to 2018. First, there would be the copper needed in the actual cars. A BEV uses about 80 kg of copper (compared to around 20 for an ICE). At 15.5 million cars and light trucks sold per year in the US that's 1.2 million metric tons of copper per year. World copper production is 22 million metric tons per year, so 5% of world copper production. Then there would be any copper needed for any upgrades to the electrical distribution system. Working out from the home, level 2 EV charging draws about the same amount of power as an electric clothes dryer. Most home electrical systems are already designed to handle the load of a clothes dryer running during the day when households are also using their other electrical appliances. They should have no trouble with someone charging their EV overnight (which electric companies will encourage with lower overnight rates). The key here is that in most cases EV charging at home won't increase the peak load. It will just raise the average load. So no need for new wiring. The same should be true of most of the electrical distribution infrastructure in cities. Maybe we'll need to build more transmission lines between cities and regions. But those are usually made of aluminum, not copper. Copper is more conductive than aluminum so to make an aluminum wire with the same capacity it was to have a cross section about 56% bigger, so your wire has 56% more aluminum by volume. But copper is way denser than aluminum (8.96 g/cm^3 vs 2.7 g/cm^3) so the aluminum wire is only 47% as heavy as the copper wire. For lines that are not buried that means your supports only have to be half as strong, lowering their costs. Aluminum is also a lot cheaper ($2.57/kg vs $9.50/kg) so the aluminum wire is only about 13% of the cost of the copper wire. That's a huge win even with buried lines. What else would be needed that would use copper?
- pfdietz 2y ago

johnea 2y ago

Wow, the Japanese auto makers are pretty frikin desperate to avoid electrification 8-( It's clear they don't want to give up the dominance in mechanical engineering that is manifest in their internal combustion engines. I just wonder why they haven't more significantly emphasized plug-in hybrids. Just multiplying the battery capacity of a Prius, and letting it plug in would be a huge entry into low cost electrification that would still leverage their mechanical dominance in the industry (read as: greatest longevity by far). What up Mr. Toyoda?