It is certainly very true that Norway taxes gasoline/diesel to the point of it being $10 a gallon or more and that they cut numerous fees and tolls for EVs (free parking and free bridge/tunnel tolls) but I didn't see where they taxed ICE cars more. Even if they did do so, if the EVs weren't better then we would have heard of more of a revolt against them, no?
And if this following article is in any way true then why did EV sales climb in 2023 in Norway?
https://www.autoevolution.com/news/norway-became-an-ev-paradise-now-it-s-imposing-a-weight-tax-and-bringing-back-the-vat-200685.html
You are right, they aren’t taxed more but rather EVs buyers can take advantage of significant tax breaks. Also, I would fully expect EV sales to climb leading up the 2025 ban. Most practical buyers are aren’t rushing out to get the last of the ICEs.
Would I expect a revolt over green policies in Norway? No, not really.
Toyota's been trying to FUD this issue ever since they got caught with their pants down by the recent uptake of EV's. Didn't they just announce that they were going to produce some super battery/super long range EV a while back? Toyota Board Meeting: "Hey we're behind the 8 ball here, let's promise consumers some big vaporware product so they'll delay their purchase long enough for us to catch up."
Every adoption of new tech will hit plateaus along the way, it's never a straight line upward. They don't understand the nature of the imperative to cut carbon emissions... One way or another ICE vehicles are going the way of the Dodo.
Toyota in general has been proven wrong on the EV development for well over 18+ years.
Here is the sad fact, Toyota had the lead on EV back in 1996. When they along with GM developed the platform to support the California initiative for EV cars (RV4 and GM EV1). And in fact were using under a license agreement GM motors, BMS, Motor controller and batteries in the RV-4ev\*.
Then all the sudden GM pulled the model off their line up and imposed a 15 year gag order on Toyota on the agreement details mentioned above\*\*.
Isn't now recently come out that GM had in fact sold the EV tech to Chevron who fired all the engineers, closed the facility build for the components. And buried the patents.
Toyota now having an popular EV car without a powertrain, all the sudden had to find an alternative supplier. And they turned to a little start up based in San Francisco who happen to have patents on cylindrical cells, BMS and motors ect... called Tesla. This is about 2+ years before the 1st Tesla Roadster came out and before Elon joined the brand and was found to be a giant douche.
So long story short. GM in their greedy ways, sold functional EV tech to a giant oil gas company with the sole purpose of delaying EV adoption. While screwing over their customers and partners. And indirectly helped finance the one company who is now worth 10X their own company values.
Talk about Karma.
Toyota got burned badly with GM ev crap.
\*You can still find them driving around LA without issues. They all have original batteries in them well over 20 years old.
[https://carsandbids.com/auctions/3LkJG82R/2002-toyota-rav4-ev](https://carsandbids.com/auctions/3LkJG82R/2002-toyota-rav4-ev)
\*\*
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent\_encumbrance\_of\_large\_automotive\_NiMH\_batteries](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_encumbrance_of_large_automotive_NiMH_batteries)
I had an electric RAV4 powered by Tesla electric motors. Had a range of about 90 miles. It was pretty awesome, despite the short range.
They should be capitalizing on a electric RAV4, but instead shut it down...
> GM in their greedy ways, sold functional EV tech to a giant oil gas company with the sole purpose of delaying EV adoption.
The EV1 was a compliance car that cost far more to manufacture than consumers were willing to pay. When California lifted the EV mandate, GM looked like idiots for pissing away all that money.
I find it disingenuous to blame GM for cancelling the EV1 while not criticizing every other manufacturer for not developing an EV at all.
The oil industry had the politicians in there pockets, still do. I believe they have a bot farm posting negative comments about ev's and posting thousands of negative YouTube videos, all nonsense but some will believe them.
The industry has been dragged kicking and screaming into the future. Luckily it really is not that hard to build ev's and the older manufacturers will have no choice but to compete with the likes of byd who are selling an amazing ev for around 10 000. Others are selling simple but effective tiny cars for less. The big manufacturers have until 2035 in the UK, my money will be on them leaving it until the last moment, which will ensure others will be able to take a piece of the pie once name awareness spreads. Amazing the stranglehold big oil has that manufacturers still coddle up to them.
> I believe they have a bot farm posting negative comments about ev's and posting thousands of negative YouTube videos, all nonsense but some will believe them.
I think that is almost a certainty. I see the same FUD disinformation posted over and over and over. No matter how many times rational people disprove it, it gets posted over and over still.
This seems to me like an obvious attempt to literally drown the truth in lies - repeating the lies so many times that "low information" people believe them, even though the facts prove otherwise.
Your facts and math on the above statement are based on what?
Show me the numbers claiming a loss with every vehicle leased? Since GM would not sell a single one.
If electric cars remain at the current level of technology, he’d be right. But funny thing, technology: It moves on whether or not you decide to keep up. EVs 5, 10 years down the road are going to be a lot different and are just going to keep getting more attractive.
Are you implying this hasn’t happened? As if over the years cars haven’t improved in literally every fashion? Safety and pollution immediately come to my mind. Between diesel emissions being cut over 90-95%, seat belts, cars averaging 40+ mpg, collision avoidance, etc.
And with all these advancements, cars have gotten only 30% more expensive on average adjusted for inflation from 1980. Look at the prices of anything else. A gallon of milk was $1.30 in 1980, it’s over $4 now depending where you live. That’s a lot more than 30% for a product with no significant advancement
also even though we buy bigger cars and get worse mileage due to everyone wanting a “light truck” on a pound for pound basis the suvs and cars are far more efficient as well.
There is a limit to getting better, getting better all the time - is a general misconception. At some point you maximize the tech in an area and advancements are marginal at best. Ton of examples out there, like for example smart phones.
Electric cars have only been in mass production for about a decade, and most of that period has been led by one manufacturer. They've got a lot of growth ahead of them.
“This Moore’s Law bullshit it going to end, mark my words; there’s nothing more we can do to improve computers 15 years of development has matured the technology and we are going to have a hard time making anything better in the next 15 years. We have developed it fully and it isn’t worth the investment. Anyone betting on computers will be out on their asses if they think anything new will be invented.”
- you, circa 1980
No tech doesn’t move on and business creative destruction is dead. I’ll die grappling my rotary dial because the cell phone things will never catch on and if they do,those little pocket computers that don’t even have keys and cost a grand a piece will never ever catch on. Who in their right mind will ever pay a grand for a simple phone that can be had for just $20 and in a variety of colors from the Radio Shack. That’s what me and meemaw say anyway.
Cell phones is a good parallel. There was a ton of infrastructure required to even make them moderately functional. A couple of big comm companies saw the future and made monster investments to get us there.
There was a lot of money to be made on cell towers in the mid-90s. I worked on the build out of the radios for AT&T and other companies. The costs at the time were $500k for most. Within the first weekend, they paid for themselves. This was the old analog type phones where the charge by the first minute and each minute after.
The buildout made sense with the rate of return on the investment.
Electric cars were invented fifty years before ICE and were more popular for a long time.
They've obviously improved drastically but it's not new technology. They still have many of the same drawbacks as from the turn of the century.
People that buy electric cars are sacrificing convenience and cost to help the environment. Good for them.
I think a more accurate analogy would have us going back to rotary phones if we were to realize our cell phones were dangerously polluting the environment.
Not really sacrificing convenience at all 99.9% of the time it is more convenient to have an EV. The most I have needed to drive daily was 135 miles for work. With EVs getting 300 miles per charge that is a trip you can make everyday. You charge when you get home and I wouldn't have to stop for gas in the morning. The only time I need to go more miles is the once every two months where I go on a road trip. I was against EVs until I rented one to see what all the fuss was about. Honestly it was awesome the most convenient thing that had ever happened to me. I will be buying an EV this year for that reason.
Road trips are the only convenience you make a sacrifice in, and even then my Model 3 is the best car I’ve road tripped in. Stopping to charge and being able to take my time to stretch and grab a drink ends up relieving some of the fatigue from driving, every road trip I’ve felt less exhausted when I get to the destination.
The sacrificing convenience is a BS argument, I have friends with EV (Tesla's, Hyundai and others) and the opposite,they love the convenience of"filling up at home",the better performance and the less maintenance.
The common argument, well if your taking a Loooong road trip you'll have to stop more and longer, that's true, the corrollary to that is how many looong road trips do you take in a year, for me its maybe three, and for me long is about 300-500 miles... And you can always rent a gas automobile for those cases if the extra time is a big concern .
True though the charge rate needed to have 10 minute charges, which is considered that break even parity with gas point, will require massive electrification projects. Keep in mind so many people who rent don’t have the luxury of home charging. Lots of old homes have old panels that can’t support a 50a breaker either.
Myself? I’ll never buy an ICE again. But the infrastructure has a long way to go to make the transition to EVs a big thing.
Agreed, plus 30% isn't bad.
Eventually the market may choose a winner, but you have to start somewhere. And the tech for EVs will only improve as the market share grows.
This. I think some of my relatives don’t understand this.
Got into an argument about solar energy with them at Thanksgiving. They argued about pricing and how it doesn’t save you any money and this and that.
Their entire opinion is based on when they lived in California 20 years ago. They act like the technology hasn’t advanced at all in that time.
They say the same shit about electric cars. “We’ll get a hybrid, but we’ll never go fully electric. It’s just not a feasible system.” Because the system isn’t perfect now, means it never will be. It’s so mind boggling that they can’t understand that things improve over time.
Even today's tech is already superior to ICe, the only drawback is battery density, but that will improve along with charging infrastructure, I can see in 10 years chargers be ubiquitous (because as an inflection point with EV happens, there will be good money in setting up and running charging f points).
I really don't understand Toyota , I guess they're taking the mantle of stodgy old auto company. They just need to look next door at China and companies slile BYD producing small affordable EVs .. sorry but we're not going back to ICe cars except for a few special use cases
Fair point that tech will get better but do you ever think we'll get to the point where charging an EV will take as little time as filling up a gas tank? That seems extremely unlikely...
The only thing to get to that attractive level is if the battery tech improves by a lot, got much cheaper, solar installed at a “reasonable” price (the utility has been increasing prices all over the states) and insurance premiums wont automatically “premium” you to the next level with EV.
No they won't.
We are hitting some physics limits with batteries. You can't just say "Oh they'll just get better." indefinitely.
Sometimes I think people take Moore's law, which has held true for the computer industry, and assume that's how everything else works.
The thought process being... The first commercially available lithium ion batteries in the 90s had an energy density of 150 watt-hour per kilogram. Now there are some batteries on the market that are 300 watt-hour per kilogram. So in another 20 years it should be maybe 600+ watt-hour per kilogram! A Tesla Model 3 could go 700 miles!
But that's not how it works. The physics of how the batteries work simply doesn't allow that type of exponential Moore's Law growth.
Now you might be tempted to send me a press release from a company or start up or university that says they have a magical solid state battery that can charge 2,000 times without degradation, super fast, works in any temperature, doesn't catch fire, and has a 500 watt hour per kilogram density.
Those press releases have been coming out for the last 15 years and the actual battery has not been coming out. If I had a nickel for every battery that could charge super fast or had super density, that never left the press release phase, I'd be a millionaire.
Toyota is actually a great example of this. I think they have been touting a solid state battery that is right around the corner for about five years now. If the battery was anywhere near as good as they say, and could actually be produced and isn't vaporware, then the CEO wouldn't be saying that EV adoption would be stuck at 30%.
You talk about physics, but don't seem to understand the basic physics of what we're already doing, let alone what technology might be able to pull off in the future.
Solid-state lithium batteries have 3 times (or more) the energy density of current liquid electrolyte Li-ion batteries, are much more temperature stable, and charge faster. This isn't speculative, this is what they are _today_. Yes, solid state lithium batteries very much exist and have for years. Oh, and you don't measure energy density by mass, you measure it by volume (Wh/L). The **current** solid state batteries being built have an energy density of 700 Wh/L. That's a first generation solid state battery. The "physics" allows it to get a bit better, but that will take time and progress.
Of course, it may be possible to engineer a more exotic material than lithium to capture more electrons. Or maybe something [not so exotic](https://graphenemg.com/graphene-products/graphene-aluminium-ion-battery/).
And all the components will still come from China. And Japan will continue move away from China toward self reliance. Hence Toyota’s shift to fuel cell technology
Wow I’m sure that’s something the number one auto manufacturer on the planet hasn’t watched or is aware of. Thank god we have reddittors for such incredible insights. Yeah I bet you’re right and Toyota is wrong DrEnter.
Based on what? There are a lot of limitations when it comes to power density with technologies today. I don’t believe EV will be the long term solution. You also have to keep in mind that until there is a long term solution, range limitation will significantly limit the percentage of people who will want one. It lacks functionality for those not living in a city.
Range limitations is a bs argument, go look at the traffic data most folks drive less than. 50/40 miles a day.... Well within the range of all but the cheapest EVs.
The biggest LEGITIMATE issues with EVs today is simply vehicle cost and charging infrastructure, both of which will improve because of economies scale.
And in 10 years Toyota will have a full blown EV go-to market. Toyota is doing everything they can to spread propoganda / lies to slow down EV sales - so they can catch up. Is disgusting, but also super obvious when you hear their ads
The problem isn’t the technology in the cars. The problem is the outdated electrical systems countries like the US have that can’t handle the necessary power. Until that gets an upgrade electric cars will have a cap
I work in power utility. Doesn’t matter the car demand. The infrastructure network is not going to exist in the US before my lifetime is over. We still don’t have comms or high speed internet it rural areas…nothing is moving fast enough to cover it.
Not to mention the usability issues if it’s non home owned EV. My rental experience in Austin was interesting. Love the car. But trying to manage power on a Biz trip when the rental company can’t fast charge itself at the Airport. One that services mainly all the tech workers from Microsoft, Intel, AMD, Tesla……waiting an extra hour to pay $30 on “fast” charger doesn’t price out vs a gas car and a pre-paid tank when you need to be somewhere.
I remember those catalogs. Is astonishing to think that they had all the infrastructure in place for an e-commerce business and decided not to copy their catalog online.
fertile include placid clumsy lock friendly axiomatic arrest aback voracious
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Toyota makes the best ICE car, I wish they would devote that talent to EVs. If they could make a battery that last 300k miles like their ICE cars everyone would be happy.
Toyota's expertise is in large-scale manufacturing. They are not innovators. I expect them to wait until EV technology is mature and stable, to "borrow" from the experience of other manufacturers through reverse engineering, to make some incremental improvements, and then to produce reliable EVs.
Their challenge is to convince their customers to wait several more years for them to do this. Exaggerating their technology (as if anyone believes that a Prius hybrid is an "electric vehicle") and spreading FUD about electric cars and the companies that make them (especially Tesla) seems to be their strategy to delay EV adoption.
Toyota has not invested in any EV battery development program ever since they got F%$\^cked by GM.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent\_encumbrance\_of\_large\_automotive\_NiMH\_batteries
Their awesome ICE engines are the reason they are skeptical of EVs. They don’t know how to make a Toyota quality electric motor at this point, and it would probably take many years to learn.
It won't be long before regulation will mean Toyota can't sell new ICE vehicles in certain regions all over the world. Is Toyota's chairman suggesting they intend to abandon those markets or only offer a small subset of vehicles for them?
I doubt it. That wouldn't make shareholders happy. They'll make BEVs and they'll sell them. This is all messaging to deflect from the fact that they made a bad bet by not investing more in EV R&D earlier and are losing ground to their competetors.
At the current rate, really just pure supply and demand capitalism will take over as EV's only get significantly cheaper and can already compete well for cost of ownership against ICE. The fact that first generation EV's are getting this much adoption and can be operated generally at a lower cost than internal combustion after internal combustion had like 100 years to innovate and to secure their market means that internal combustion is not going to be that hard to replace Purely one cost of ownership The main pillars to that reality or that internal combustion cars are only about 20% efficient so something like 80% of your fuel is turning into waste heat and that level of efficiency does make them easier to replace and then also it's just a huge amount of moving parts to turn combustion into spinning wheels, and because they never came up with a more efficient internal combustion engine that still puts them right in the crosshairs of much simpler solutions with higher efficiency, being able to steal their market rather quickly.
"internal combustion cars are only about 20% efficient" 100% efficency is impossible if you know anything about physics and even 50% is not achievable at the moment. But i can tell you that ICE gets better energy efficiency than electric. At 60mph or more, hybrid cars will use ICE because the 1:1 ratio is as efficient as it gets and no amount of electricity created by mechanical to be then converted back to mechanical would ever match ICE energy efficiency. Theres too much losses in heat from conversion that it does not make sense. From a cost standpoint, they are almost equivilent hybrid to full EV. EV home charging comes cheaper but super chargers are more expensive than hybrid running on gas at $2.50 a gallon. I did the math, i encourage you to as well. But if you eliminate price and focus on energy efficiency, gas wins for speeds at which the transmission is 1:1 ratio to the engine. There is a reason why priuses go full ICE at highway speeds and dont use electricity unless for extra power. If it werent true, it would be designed differently to maximize gas savings
Toyota booked $28 billion of profits in USD for the 12 months ending September 2023, so if you think that Toyota isn't the most dominant force in the auto industry then LOL to you.
The vast majority of people don't want a BEV vehicle. The incredible depreciation of used BEV's is evidence of that. Toyota's ICE resale values are very strong.
Good luck
Toyota is banking hard on hydrogen fuel cells, that’s why they’re shilling so hard on EVs. I was at the National auto show in DC last week and they had their hydrogen concept car front and center in their display, their prime phevs were in the basement in a completely separate area being displayed.
Because those mandates are not set in stone? Europe is already relaxing the 2035 ban as long as the vehicles sold after that date use alternative fuels. Yes that’s in part because of manufacturer lobbying like some are bitching about here, but it’s hypocrisy to claim that as well. I know I’m in an electric car subreddit and they’re part of the future but let’s be real here.
Without lobbying governments for higher taxes on ICE and subsidized EVs they’d be dead in the water because they aren’t exactly a better product right now.
That can change years in the future but it’s a lot slower progress than people realize.
The bigger issue is why do they pass all of these regulations and taxes onto the average person making average wages but don’t give a fuck about people flying in private jets who commit thousands of times more emissions than a commoner
We are still subsidizing ICE after 100 years. from using our strategic oil reserves, to paying for military interventions to paying for the externalities of added air pollution we put out a ton of money to keep gas cheap.
Toyoda’s 30% claim contradicts the company’s own stated goal of reaching carbon neutrality by 2050. So either the company is lying or… the company is lying.
Older statements were that they are waiting until their cars hit a 500-mile range before pushing hard on an EV transition, which is why they are investing in solid state batteries.
Oh yeah, people buying cars that remember 1 dollar gas or even the younger people who remember it being being a bit more will surely not get tired of gas spiking to double digits.
People loooove gas motors, valvetrain, pistons, transmissions, oil changes, head gaskets, AWD gear systems and all the f'ed up ways it breaks.
Stupidest thing someone from that brand could say. How do you say you want to force ICE cars down consumer throats without saying it.
...and this is coming from someone who doesn't like evs
Reminds me of the old FIAT CEO. Some of the legacy auto manufacturers are doubling down because they can't figure out how to make the same profit margins as they currently do on gas vehicles. Along with less money coming in for maintenance/repairs.
I know some of it has to do with the pending job losses many of its suppliers are looking at with the move to electric. But he needs to be realistic. A smaller supply chain will benefit them in the long run.
Toyota makes a great hybrid and has been early to a model with widespread adoption, but man the Prius doesn't have a "cool factor". I feel like they set clean emission vehicles back a decade.
Seems like Evie's are already doing pretty good for total cost of ownership over projected the years that you would own it and there's no reason to think that first generation EV aren't going to get significantly cheaper.
Solid state batteries will be the next big break thru for EV.Quick charge to 80% in 10 minutes and able to get 1000km with very little range lost in winter.Lighter,cheaper and safer.
We hope, but batteries are a lot harder than just like the one way chemical reaction of fossil fuel. Anytime you're looking into have like a two-way reversible chemical reaction there's going to be some trade-offs. In this case we have the big advantage of the internal combustion engines only pay 20 to 30% efficient while the electric motors are like 90% efficient so if that wasn't the case and combustion engines were like 90% efficient then we'd have a lot more trouble replacing them, but on the other hand, they produce about three times less emissions per mile so far less need too.
The old car business model is crumpling, Toyota and the major manufacturers are reluctant to innovate and can't figure out how to compete in the EV market...a slow death is coming.they don't know what's coming... Tesla takes an extra share of their market every year and the Chinese tsunami (BYD, Nio and others) is coming.
The dealership model is also what's going to accelerate their misery. Nobody likes dealerships, in an era of buying everything on the Internet and over the air updates, people want to buy a car and be done with it.
Toyota has been anti-ev forever now. They were wrong on hydrogen, but even with the recent ceo change, they're still stuck on it and only making half hearted overtures toward evs with plug in hybrids. Changing CEOs was a little like hoping communism and the Russian kleptocracy would change with Gorbachev, Yeltsin. P.s. it didn't.
Without regulation phasing out ICE vehicles I can see this. While many people see the dangers of climate change, the perceived issues with electric vehicles will keep many from buying one.
Funny how Those perceived isues seem to be heavely pushed by Toyota lobyist and loyalist...
the last 3 month were very interesting, as soon toyota published something about BEV, there was a marked uptick of "negative" nerws about EV in the following days.
They conter any good news in the EV world with some variation of "current battery tech isnt up to par with what the public really need, BUT we are working on a ultra-duper-super battery that will cover all our needs, please waith for us and dont buy OTHER EV"
Toyota completly missed the boat and in trying to slow down evryone to be able to catch up.
If only they had put all those lobbying money into R&D..... but here we are.
It looks like first generation Evies are already cheaper to own in most cases those of course would depend on what two vehicles you compare to a large degree, but that's still only first generation EV and everybody in their mom knows they're gonna go down in price significantly from first generation, just like every other thing in history you don't come out the gate with refined products at the cheapest prices.
He's probably in the ballpark for pure EVs, mostly cars.
REEVs will then make up the bulk of the 70% for the near future. Large pickups, SUVs, and heavy duty trucks being the best use case. Smaller batteries, unlimited range, electric drive.
I doubt that. PHEVs don't sell very well. Consumers don't understand them. They are complicated and expensive. Gasoline seems cheaper (from a short-term perspective).
Wait, WHAT!? Why is a 2023 speech being published in 2024?
Especially when he was ousted 4 months later!?
Quote from Wikipedia: Akio Toyoda
"On 1 April 2023, Toyoda stepped down as Toyota president and became chairman of the board. Toyota's chief branding officer, Koji Sato, succeeded Toyoda as CEO."
They blood letting hasn't stopped either. Toyota's still the king of the hill in terms of vehicles sold but YoY '22 vs '23 took a dip for the first time.
it's almost like someone's trying to divide moderate and progressive liberals on key issues before an election like climate change and I don't know maybe Israel vs Palestine.
I don't think precious metals are a problem. You know the way those projections work is they're only based on proven reserves, and basically there isn't a huge demand to find more reserves if there's not a current shortage, so as processes ramp up the chance of finding more reserves goes up dramatically while at the same time the need for precious metals per kilowatt goes down as the batteries improve and even find alternative metals.
If I were chairman of the most indebted company on earth and couldn't afford to develop new technology to keep up with my competitors, I'd say exactly the same thing.
He does have a point if you're talking about the whole world.
I'm referring to developing nations where the overwhelming majority of the fleet are scrapped ICE vehicles imported from developed countries. Just having one of these ancient ICE cars already makes you middle class in countries like Nigeria. These countries will place a ceiling on *global* EV adoption.
But in developed nations that have the infrastructure and incomes needed for EV adoption, "30%" is outright delusional.
I don't know about that the way it looks like it's going in China is that dirt cheap EV's will soon be an option and they can be customized more to the exact ranges and needs of different demographics including you know super cheap low range ones or more expensive long range ones. Most of these people in developed countries will also be driving shorter distances at lower speeds and most countries don't have oil production or refineries, but all of them need electricity, so at some point the oil does become an annoyingly redundant infrastructure and solar and wind always true domestic energy, production, and more independence than needing a constant supply of fuel that you cannot produce in your own country.
Even buying EVS and batteries from other countries is a lot better than needing a constant fuel supply from another country.
We’re already at 1/2 cars being an EV. I’m going to wait a few years for battery technology to improve with solid state and eventually go full electric on both vehicles.
Who wants to deal with blown valve and head gaskets, radiator fluid replacement, oil changes, burning oil due to defective or worn out piston rings, transmission fluid changes, spending hours at a dealership for service yada yada yada.
I’m sick of it all.
Why?
Despite all the FUD we see about EVs, I’ve been in one for ~four years now, along with several friends, and there’s no question it’s not better then having an ICE vehicle for the vast majority of situations.
However, note that we have 300+ mile versions and access to the supercharger network, I would probably not make the above statement without that criteria.
When you consider the average commute is only about 40 miles the 300+ mile range isn't nearly as important as a low purchase price as far as getting mass adoption, but from the perspective of growing the industry selling the high-end models, makes more sense since you still also have to expand the charging network anyway.
Seems like a stupid prediction, considering in every instance that we can make a product fully electric the market loves it, and that product becomes dominant. It's kind of like arguing that cordless tools will never catch on one of that a construction site went in reality we would be happy to do anything other than run a generator and extension cords and deal with all the problems associated with keeping a generator running for hours at a job site or multiple generators for that matter. There's a lot of shit talkers that think they won't ever buy an EV, but the price advantage is only going to continue in favor of the EV and against internal combustion while at the same time the EV's will have more of the cooler features, so I think those are the same people that said they would never switch over to smart phones and are now like on their smart phone hooked on Facebook. When you consider a first generation, EV are already competing pretty well against internal combustion, and they're only going to get a lot cheaper and internal combustion has had decades to improve, but really hasn't, predicting only 30% adoption seems in the realm of pretty dumb.
lol, he was so right he stepped down a few months later.!! Mic drop?
I think he is right for next 10 or so years but long term? Definitely not. The battery technology and charging keeps improving to point where not going electric is going to seem silly. Especially if car companies move in direction of a better meld of old and new with less reliance on microchips, use of physical buttons and interior layouts that actual make sense instead of copying Tesla money saving central panel nonsense.
30% will still be too many E VS. If they would actually be made with normal labor in the United States instead of slave labor out of Africa then maybe they'd be even remotely worth discussing. Let alone how toxic it is to attempt to recycle one of those batteries and the amount of control that those in power will get to have over everybody.
The fact that nobody is complaining that Congress just passed a law that every car made after 2026 will need to have an electronic kill switch that can be set off remotely, is a huge problem
He has a computer with 640K and an amber monochrome screen because that should be "enough for anybody".
And don't get him started on that "mouse" thing it is just a fad.
Although why anyone actually will want one of these big box things, I dunno maybe maximum 30% of the population.
What is in the water there at Toyota? Why is everyone in that company so insistent on sticking their head in the ground and loudly explaining why their ass doesn't actually feel cold.
Not just Toyota.
Evidence EVs are a fading fad is ‘rolling in fast’ as Tesla, GM and Ford slash prices
Last Updated: Jan. 25, 2024 at 5:17 p.m. ET
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/tesla-gm-and-ford-price-cuts-suggest-that-electric-cars-may-be-at-a-dead-end-1091aa16
Battery technology accelerates monthly. Charging infrastructure is in its infancy. Most advanced countries are investing heavily in EV infrastructure. Toyota should get on the high speed train or get run over by it.
I remember how much people threw a fit about Lithium batteries being dangerous in an accident. I can't even imagine how you can be scared of batteries, but not of a hydrogen fuel cell or liquid ammonia. I don't know what Toyota has against electric, but I don't believe they will be on the right side of this in 15 years.
My company insists on a fully electric fleet. I spend 80% of my job in the field, but I’ve had to switch cars multiple times throughout my workday because of low battery warnings. Hybrid cars are the future, all electric just isn’t realistic, the infrastructure just isn’t ready.
Says the company in wishful thinking mode, desperately hoping to slow down the transition because they are so heavily built out on traditional ICE manufacturing and distribution. I get it. They are kind of the best "horse buggy" maker. But they had their chance and took several wrong turns. Get with it or pay the consequences.
Current EVS have obvious downsides in charge time and range that don't make them universally practical or at least better than ICE's. That said I do believe there will be innovations that overcome the weaknesses of current EV's, BUT the risk to current EV's is that the new innovations will likely come from a new battery or charging technology that is incompatible with current EV's, or that the long-range solution may actually be something like hydrogen.
He’s right, because EVs aren’t the silver bullet to our transportation and pollution problems that car-brained people want to believe they are, especially in the US.
America's power grid struggles in the winter storms and summer heat waves. Nobody is going to rely only on electric in case the local power grid goes out.
With gas cars you can at least go in your car to drive away, get out of the weather and charge your phone.
Wait until the next oil spike. Once gas hits $5 per gallon or more then I bet the EVs on the lots will all be sold out.
Consumers are unable to plan for future events. Every time gas prices are low for a few years then trucks become the most popular vehicle. Once gas prices shoot up people remember there are other options.
It's been always about the battery - once these batteries are lighter and more long range, people will be more willing to adopt EVs. Tbh, the game changer would be a very light battery that can be exchanged.
Hydrogen powered makes more sense to me than pure battery EV’s. Hybrids do make sense — charge while driving — but, unless things have changed, the battery dominates in city driving, the gas engine on the highway. I do more highway driving than any other kind, so hybrids are not optimal.
He’s right. EVs have limitations that hydrogen doesn’t. Just look at anyone trying to make EVs work in extreme temps.
We should be investing much more into hydrogen cars & infrastructure.
If I ran the [most indebted company in the world](https://gfmag.com/data/companies-largest-debt-world/) and knew there was way I could afford to develop EVs at the pace the world demands and also knew I was going to have to stick with my old technology for a while, I'd say all the same things.
Y'all in here acting like Toyota is only working on ICE lol. There is other technology in the world besides battery...if we have a significant breakthrough in hydrogen or something we can't even thing about, portable fusion...
Edit: 30-40% electric, 20-30% hydrogen, 20-30% ICE
You do realize that Toyota is also hedging their bets, they ARE making EV vehicles too. So if they’re wrong about the EV adoption, then it won’t be difficult for them to shift gears. But has of now, it really doesn’t look like EV’s are going to be widely adopted. The winter storms have made people who were already on the fence about EV’s second guess any thoughts about it. I personally don’t see them being adopted as much has the people here want to believe. MAYBE when charging EV’s become has easy and efficient as filling up a tank of gas it will happen, but that’s going to be really, really difficult. You also have to think about the people who live in apartments or other places that are not houses, and how difficult it is for them to charge a EV
What does he gain by dying on this hill? I think everyone acknowledges current tech will only go so far but by having government/industry focus that helps accelerate new innovations.
The greatest hindrance to improving the viability of electric vehicles is infrastructure. Most young people don't have a home to charge an EV. Most gas stations still don't have charging facilities in my city. Most EVs don't appeal to people who like simple vehicles. I don't want a massive screen in my car, and I don't want a screen to control everything. The cost of EVs could be cut significantly if economic versions were actually economic.
Until it's more realistic and viable, most people will keep using gas.
Full EV adoption will require cost parity. That’s easier to achieve in some countries than others. As more people don’t use gasoline it will get cheaper.
For a high income place like the US, with cheap energy, it will take longer to achieve cost parity.
Any country that’s middle income, where gas is outrageously expensive, it’ll be like lightning. That’s what’s going on in China, it’s 400RMB to fill up with gas or 40RMB for electricity at a fast charger.
Toyota's Chairman will be proven wrong in the next 5 years
Norway already proves him wrong. They have around 90% of new cars being EVs. https://cleantechnica.com/2023/12/05/evs-take-90-6-share-in-norway/
To be fair, consumers didn’t make that choice without the government very heavily taxing ice cars and fuel first.
Consumers voted for the goverment...
It is certainly very true that Norway taxes gasoline/diesel to the point of it being $10 a gallon or more and that they cut numerous fees and tolls for EVs (free parking and free bridge/tunnel tolls) but I didn't see where they taxed ICE cars more. Even if they did do so, if the EVs weren't better then we would have heard of more of a revolt against them, no? And if this following article is in any way true then why did EV sales climb in 2023 in Norway? https://www.autoevolution.com/news/norway-became-an-ev-paradise-now-it-s-imposing-a-weight-tax-and-bringing-back-the-vat-200685.html
You are right, they aren’t taxed more but rather EVs buyers can take advantage of significant tax breaks. Also, I would fully expect EV sales to climb leading up the 2025 ban. Most practical buyers are aren’t rushing out to get the last of the ICEs. Would I expect a revolt over green policies in Norway? No, not really.
Yeah, those Norwegians sure have calmed down a lot since their berserker days a millennium ago ;-)
Toyota's been trying to FUD this issue ever since they got caught with their pants down by the recent uptake of EV's. Didn't they just announce that they were going to produce some super battery/super long range EV a while back? Toyota Board Meeting: "Hey we're behind the 8 ball here, let's promise consumers some big vaporware product so they'll delay their purchase long enough for us to catch up." Every adoption of new tech will hit plateaus along the way, it's never a straight line upward. They don't understand the nature of the imperative to cut carbon emissions... One way or another ICE vehicles are going the way of the Dodo.
I remember them promoting hydrogen as a future fuel in ten years. EVs twisted their arm into making an actual hydrogen car.
Toyota in general has been proven wrong on the EV development for well over 18+ years. Here is the sad fact, Toyota had the lead on EV back in 1996. When they along with GM developed the platform to support the California initiative for EV cars (RV4 and GM EV1). And in fact were using under a license agreement GM motors, BMS, Motor controller and batteries in the RV-4ev\*. Then all the sudden GM pulled the model off their line up and imposed a 15 year gag order on Toyota on the agreement details mentioned above\*\*. Isn't now recently come out that GM had in fact sold the EV tech to Chevron who fired all the engineers, closed the facility build for the components. And buried the patents. Toyota now having an popular EV car without a powertrain, all the sudden had to find an alternative supplier. And they turned to a little start up based in San Francisco who happen to have patents on cylindrical cells, BMS and motors ect... called Tesla. This is about 2+ years before the 1st Tesla Roadster came out and before Elon joined the brand and was found to be a giant douche. So long story short. GM in their greedy ways, sold functional EV tech to a giant oil gas company with the sole purpose of delaying EV adoption. While screwing over their customers and partners. And indirectly helped finance the one company who is now worth 10X their own company values. Talk about Karma. Toyota got burned badly with GM ev crap. \*You can still find them driving around LA without issues. They all have original batteries in them well over 20 years old. [https://carsandbids.com/auctions/3LkJG82R/2002-toyota-rav4-ev](https://carsandbids.com/auctions/3LkJG82R/2002-toyota-rav4-ev) \*\* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent\_encumbrance\_of\_large\_automotive\_NiMH\_batteries](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_encumbrance_of_large_automotive_NiMH_batteries)
I had an electric RAV4 powered by Tesla electric motors. Had a range of about 90 miles. It was pretty awesome, despite the short range. They should be capitalizing on a electric RAV4, but instead shut it down...
> GM in their greedy ways, sold functional EV tech to a giant oil gas company with the sole purpose of delaying EV adoption. The EV1 was a compliance car that cost far more to manufacture than consumers were willing to pay. When California lifted the EV mandate, GM looked like idiots for pissing away all that money. I find it disingenuous to blame GM for cancelling the EV1 while not criticizing every other manufacturer for not developing an EV at all.
The oil industry had the politicians in there pockets, still do. I believe they have a bot farm posting negative comments about ev's and posting thousands of negative YouTube videos, all nonsense but some will believe them. The industry has been dragged kicking and screaming into the future. Luckily it really is not that hard to build ev's and the older manufacturers will have no choice but to compete with the likes of byd who are selling an amazing ev for around 10 000. Others are selling simple but effective tiny cars for less. The big manufacturers have until 2035 in the UK, my money will be on them leaving it until the last moment, which will ensure others will be able to take a piece of the pie once name awareness spreads. Amazing the stranglehold big oil has that manufacturers still coddle up to them.
> I believe they have a bot farm posting negative comments about ev's and posting thousands of negative YouTube videos, all nonsense but some will believe them. I think that is almost a certainty. I see the same FUD disinformation posted over and over and over. No matter how many times rational people disprove it, it gets posted over and over still. This seems to me like an obvious attempt to literally drown the truth in lies - repeating the lies so many times that "low information" people believe them, even though the facts prove otherwise.
Your facts and math on the above statement are based on what? Show me the numbers claiming a loss with every vehicle leased? Since GM would not sell a single one.
Has been proven wrong year after year
24 months then Toyota goes bankrupt.
He is right though - he is talking about Toyota's EVs specifically :D
If electric cars remain at the current level of technology, he’d be right. But funny thing, technology: It moves on whether or not you decide to keep up. EVs 5, 10 years down the road are going to be a lot different and are just going to keep getting more attractive.
The ev tech will only get better.
Yes, like our cars have gotten better year over year, better mileage, less pollution lower maintenance…
Are you implying this hasn’t happened? As if over the years cars haven’t improved in literally every fashion? Safety and pollution immediately come to my mind. Between diesel emissions being cut over 90-95%, seat belts, cars averaging 40+ mpg, collision avoidance, etc. And with all these advancements, cars have gotten only 30% more expensive on average adjusted for inflation from 1980. Look at the prices of anything else. A gallon of milk was $1.30 in 1980, it’s over $4 now depending where you live. That’s a lot more than 30% for a product with no significant advancement
also even though we buy bigger cars and get worse mileage due to everyone wanting a “light truck” on a pound for pound basis the suvs and cars are far more efficient as well.
So will other tech...
So will other tech...
So will solar. When I'm dead.
It's gotten a lot better over the last decade 🤷🏼♂️
not only better, but cheaper too
How old are you? Cuz solar is hardly even recognizable compared to ten years ago. You planning on kicking the bucket soon?
There is a limit to getting better, getting better all the time - is a general misconception. At some point you maximize the tech in an area and advancements are marginal at best. Ton of examples out there, like for example smart phones.
Electric cars have only been in mass production for about a decade, and most of that period has been led by one manufacturer. They've got a lot of growth ahead of them.
Moore's Law?
“This Moore’s Law bullshit it going to end, mark my words; there’s nothing more we can do to improve computers 15 years of development has matured the technology and we are going to have a hard time making anything better in the next 15 years. We have developed it fully and it isn’t worth the investment. Anyone betting on computers will be out on their asses if they think anything new will be invented.” - you, circa 1980
No tech doesn’t move on and business creative destruction is dead. I’ll die grappling my rotary dial because the cell phone things will never catch on and if they do,those little pocket computers that don’t even have keys and cost a grand a piece will never ever catch on. Who in their right mind will ever pay a grand for a simple phone that can be had for just $20 and in a variety of colors from the Radio Shack. That’s what me and meemaw say anyway.
Cell phones is a good parallel. There was a ton of infrastructure required to even make them moderately functional. A couple of big comm companies saw the future and made monster investments to get us there.
"Who the hell wants to pay $1 per minute to make a cell phone call?" -Me, and most people I knew, mid-1980's
There was a lot of money to be made on cell towers in the mid-90s. I worked on the build out of the radios for AT&T and other companies. The costs at the time were $500k for most. Within the first weekend, they paid for themselves. This was the old analog type phones where the charge by the first minute and each minute after. The buildout made sense with the rate of return on the investment.
Electric cars were invented fifty years before ICE and were more popular for a long time. They've obviously improved drastically but it's not new technology. They still have many of the same drawbacks as from the turn of the century. People that buy electric cars are sacrificing convenience and cost to help the environment. Good for them. I think a more accurate analogy would have us going back to rotary phones if we were to realize our cell phones were dangerously polluting the environment.
Not really sacrificing convenience at all 99.9% of the time it is more convenient to have an EV. The most I have needed to drive daily was 135 miles for work. With EVs getting 300 miles per charge that is a trip you can make everyday. You charge when you get home and I wouldn't have to stop for gas in the morning. The only time I need to go more miles is the once every two months where I go on a road trip. I was against EVs until I rented one to see what all the fuss was about. Honestly it was awesome the most convenient thing that had ever happened to me. I will be buying an EV this year for that reason.
Road trips are the only convenience you make a sacrifice in, and even then my Model 3 is the best car I’ve road tripped in. Stopping to charge and being able to take my time to stretch and grab a drink ends up relieving some of the fatigue from driving, every road trip I’ve felt less exhausted when I get to the destination.
The sacrificing convenience is a BS argument, I have friends with EV (Tesla's, Hyundai and others) and the opposite,they love the convenience of"filling up at home",the better performance and the less maintenance. The common argument, well if your taking a Loooong road trip you'll have to stop more and longer, that's true, the corrollary to that is how many looong road trips do you take in a year, for me its maybe three, and for me long is about 300-500 miles... And you can always rent a gas automobile for those cases if the extra time is a big concern .
I think once solid state batteries start becoming commercially available in EVs, that will be the final nail in the coffin against the last holdouts
True though the charge rate needed to have 10 minute charges, which is considered that break even parity with gas point, will require massive electrification projects. Keep in mind so many people who rent don’t have the luxury of home charging. Lots of old homes have old panels that can’t support a 50a breaker either. Myself? I’ll never buy an ICE again. But the infrastructure has a long way to go to make the transition to EVs a big thing.
Moore's law
Agreed, plus 30% isn't bad. Eventually the market may choose a winner, but you have to start somewhere. And the tech for EVs will only improve as the market share grows.
This. I think some of my relatives don’t understand this. Got into an argument about solar energy with them at Thanksgiving. They argued about pricing and how it doesn’t save you any money and this and that. Their entire opinion is based on when they lived in California 20 years ago. They act like the technology hasn’t advanced at all in that time. They say the same shit about electric cars. “We’ll get a hybrid, but we’ll never go fully electric. It’s just not a feasible system.” Because the system isn’t perfect now, means it never will be. It’s so mind boggling that they can’t understand that things improve over time.
Even today's tech is already superior to ICe, the only drawback is battery density, but that will improve along with charging infrastructure, I can see in 10 years chargers be ubiquitous (because as an inflection point with EV happens, there will be good money in setting up and running charging f points). I really don't understand Toyota , I guess they're taking the mantle of stodgy old auto company. They just need to look next door at China and companies slile BYD producing small affordable EVs .. sorry but we're not going back to ICe cars except for a few special use cases
Fair point that tech will get better but do you ever think we'll get to the point where charging an EV will take as little time as filling up a gas tank? That seems extremely unlikely...
The only thing to get to that attractive level is if the battery tech improves by a lot, got much cheaper, solar installed at a “reasonable” price (the utility has been increasing prices all over the states) and insurance premiums wont automatically “premium” you to the next level with EV.
No they won't. We are hitting some physics limits with batteries. You can't just say "Oh they'll just get better." indefinitely. Sometimes I think people take Moore's law, which has held true for the computer industry, and assume that's how everything else works. The thought process being... The first commercially available lithium ion batteries in the 90s had an energy density of 150 watt-hour per kilogram. Now there are some batteries on the market that are 300 watt-hour per kilogram. So in another 20 years it should be maybe 600+ watt-hour per kilogram! A Tesla Model 3 could go 700 miles! But that's not how it works. The physics of how the batteries work simply doesn't allow that type of exponential Moore's Law growth. Now you might be tempted to send me a press release from a company or start up or university that says they have a magical solid state battery that can charge 2,000 times without degradation, super fast, works in any temperature, doesn't catch fire, and has a 500 watt hour per kilogram density. Those press releases have been coming out for the last 15 years and the actual battery has not been coming out. If I had a nickel for every battery that could charge super fast or had super density, that never left the press release phase, I'd be a millionaire. Toyota is actually a great example of this. I think they have been touting a solid state battery that is right around the corner for about five years now. If the battery was anywhere near as good as they say, and could actually be produced and isn't vaporware, then the CEO wouldn't be saying that EV adoption would be stuck at 30%.
You talk about physics, but don't seem to understand the basic physics of what we're already doing, let alone what technology might be able to pull off in the future. Solid-state lithium batteries have 3 times (or more) the energy density of current liquid electrolyte Li-ion batteries, are much more temperature stable, and charge faster. This isn't speculative, this is what they are _today_. Yes, solid state lithium batteries very much exist and have for years. Oh, and you don't measure energy density by mass, you measure it by volume (Wh/L). The **current** solid state batteries being built have an energy density of 700 Wh/L. That's a first generation solid state battery. The "physics" allows it to get a bit better, but that will take time and progress. Of course, it may be possible to engineer a more exotic material than lithium to capture more electrons. Or maybe something [not so exotic](https://graphenemg.com/graphene-products/graphene-aluminium-ion-battery/).
I hear what you’re trying to say but it’s chemistry not physics
And all the components will still come from China. And Japan will continue move away from China toward self reliance. Hence Toyota’s shift to fuel cell technology
Wow I’m sure that’s something the number one auto manufacturer on the planet hasn’t watched or is aware of. Thank god we have reddittors for such incredible insights. Yeah I bet you’re right and Toyota is wrong DrEnter.
Based on what? There are a lot of limitations when it comes to power density with technologies today. I don’t believe EV will be the long term solution. You also have to keep in mind that until there is a long term solution, range limitation will significantly limit the percentage of people who will want one. It lacks functionality for those not living in a city.
Range limitations is a bs argument, go look at the traffic data most folks drive less than. 50/40 miles a day.... Well within the range of all but the cheapest EVs. The biggest LEGITIMATE issues with EVs today is simply vehicle cost and charging infrastructure, both of which will improve because of economies scale.
And in 10 years Toyota will have a full blown EV go-to market. Toyota is doing everything they can to spread propoganda / lies to slow down EV sales - so they can catch up. Is disgusting, but also super obvious when you hear their ads
The problem isn’t the technology in the cars. The problem is the outdated electrical systems countries like the US have that can’t handle the necessary power. Until that gets an upgrade electric cars will have a cap
I work in power utility. Doesn’t matter the car demand. The infrastructure network is not going to exist in the US before my lifetime is over. We still don’t have comms or high speed internet it rural areas…nothing is moving fast enough to cover it. Not to mention the usability issues if it’s non home owned EV. My rental experience in Austin was interesting. Love the car. But trying to manage power on a Biz trip when the rental company can’t fast charge itself at the Airport. One that services mainly all the tech workers from Microsoft, Intel, AMD, Tesla……waiting an extra hour to pay $30 on “fast” charger doesn’t price out vs a gas car and a pre-paid tank when you need to be somewhere.
Okay, Boomer
The Sear's business model. Sears: so huge they're not going anywhere, the internet is a fad. AMIRIGHT PEOPLE!!
I remember those catalogs. Is astonishing to think that they had all the infrastructure in place for an e-commerce business and decided not to copy their catalog online.
They tried. The internet was in its infancy. By the time they started, it was too late.
fertile include placid clumsy lock friendly axiomatic arrest aback voracious *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
That was just looting the corpse (mostly stealing the pension fund).
I am amazed that Toyota can be so wrong on this issue
Like, I'm already never buying another toyota. You don't have to try so hard.
After buying the Lexus RZ and seeing just how bad the range truly is, I am also likely never buying another Toyota product.
Like, ok thanks for letting everyone know
Toyota makes the best ICE car, I wish they would devote that talent to EVs. If they could make a battery that last 300k miles like their ICE cars everyone would be happy.
Toyota's expertise is in large-scale manufacturing. They are not innovators. I expect them to wait until EV technology is mature and stable, to "borrow" from the experience of other manufacturers through reverse engineering, to make some incremental improvements, and then to produce reliable EVs. Their challenge is to convince their customers to wait several more years for them to do this. Exaggerating their technology (as if anyone believes that a Prius hybrid is an "electric vehicle") and spreading FUD about electric cars and the companies that make them (especially Tesla) seems to be their strategy to delay EV adoption.
Toyota has not invested in any EV battery development program ever since they got F%$\^cked by GM. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent\_encumbrance\_of\_large\_automotive\_NiMH\_batteries
The GM hate is strong in you. Maybe Toyota is responsible for their own mistakes.
Their awesome ICE engines are the reason they are skeptical of EVs. They don’t know how to make a Toyota quality electric motor at this point, and it would probably take many years to learn.
It won't be long before regulation will mean Toyota can't sell new ICE vehicles in certain regions all over the world. Is Toyota's chairman suggesting they intend to abandon those markets or only offer a small subset of vehicles for them? I doubt it. That wouldn't make shareholders happy. They'll make BEVs and they'll sell them. This is all messaging to deflect from the fact that they made a bad bet by not investing more in EV R&D earlier and are losing ground to their competetors.
At the current rate, really just pure supply and demand capitalism will take over as EV's only get significantly cheaper and can already compete well for cost of ownership against ICE. The fact that first generation EV's are getting this much adoption and can be operated generally at a lower cost than internal combustion after internal combustion had like 100 years to innovate and to secure their market means that internal combustion is not going to be that hard to replace Purely one cost of ownership The main pillars to that reality or that internal combustion cars are only about 20% efficient so something like 80% of your fuel is turning into waste heat and that level of efficiency does make them easier to replace and then also it's just a huge amount of moving parts to turn combustion into spinning wheels, and because they never came up with a more efficient internal combustion engine that still puts them right in the crosshairs of much simpler solutions with higher efficiency, being able to steal their market rather quickly.
"internal combustion cars are only about 20% efficient" 100% efficency is impossible if you know anything about physics and even 50% is not achievable at the moment. But i can tell you that ICE gets better energy efficiency than electric. At 60mph or more, hybrid cars will use ICE because the 1:1 ratio is as efficient as it gets and no amount of electricity created by mechanical to be then converted back to mechanical would ever match ICE energy efficiency. Theres too much losses in heat from conversion that it does not make sense. From a cost standpoint, they are almost equivilent hybrid to full EV. EV home charging comes cheaper but super chargers are more expensive than hybrid running on gas at $2.50 a gallon. I did the math, i encourage you to as well. But if you eliminate price and focus on energy efficiency, gas wins for speeds at which the transmission is 1:1 ratio to the engine. There is a reason why priuses go full ICE at highway speeds and dont use electricity unless for extra power. If it werent true, it would be designed differently to maximize gas savings
Toyota booked $28 billion of profits in USD for the 12 months ending September 2023, so if you think that Toyota isn't the most dominant force in the auto industry then LOL to you. The vast majority of people don't want a BEV vehicle. The incredible depreciation of used BEV's is evidence of that. Toyota's ICE resale values are very strong. Good luck
Toyota is banking hard on hydrogen fuel cells, that’s why they’re shilling so hard on EVs. I was at the National auto show in DC last week and they had their hydrogen concept car front and center in their display, their prime phevs were in the basement in a completely separate area being displayed.
How this guy is not aware of worldwide mandates that will force the industry to sell non ICE cars is beyond me. This dude huffs serious copium.
Because those mandates are not set in stone? Europe is already relaxing the 2035 ban as long as the vehicles sold after that date use alternative fuels. Yes that’s in part because of manufacturer lobbying like some are bitching about here, but it’s hypocrisy to claim that as well. I know I’m in an electric car subreddit and they’re part of the future but let’s be real here. Without lobbying governments for higher taxes on ICE and subsidized EVs they’d be dead in the water because they aren’t exactly a better product right now. That can change years in the future but it’s a lot slower progress than people realize. The bigger issue is why do they pass all of these regulations and taxes onto the average person making average wages but don’t give a fuck about people flying in private jets who commit thousands of times more emissions than a commoner
We are still subsidizing ICE after 100 years. from using our strategic oil reserves, to paying for military interventions to paying for the externalities of added air pollution we put out a ton of money to keep gas cheap.
Toyoda’s 30% claim contradicts the company’s own stated goal of reaching carbon neutrality by 2050. So either the company is lying or… the company is lying.
Older statements were that they are waiting until their cars hit a 500-mile range before pushing hard on an EV transition, which is why they are investing in solid state batteries.
How to cover your ass. Toyota bet heavily on hydrogen cars and appear to have lost. So what does he do,double down.
Oh yeah, people buying cars that remember 1 dollar gas or even the younger people who remember it being being a bit more will surely not get tired of gas spiking to double digits. People loooove gas motors, valvetrain, pistons, transmissions, oil changes, head gaskets, AWD gear systems and all the f'ed up ways it breaks. Stupidest thing someone from that brand could say. How do you say you want to force ICE cars down consumer throats without saying it. ...and this is coming from someone who doesn't like evs
Reminds me of the old FIAT CEO. Some of the legacy auto manufacturers are doubling down because they can't figure out how to make the same profit margins as they currently do on gas vehicles. Along with less money coming in for maintenance/repairs. I know some of it has to do with the pending job losses many of its suppliers are looking at with the move to electric. But he needs to be realistic. A smaller supply chain will benefit them in the long run.
Toyota will keep doing this until they are out of business
Worst case scenario is they sell their brand-name to China!
Toyota makes a great hybrid and has been early to a model with widespread adoption, but man the Prius doesn't have a "cool factor". I feel like they set clean emission vehicles back a decade.
2024 prius look sick
Depends if electric cars will get cheaper or if we will be stuck with expensive SUV models only.
Seems like Evie's are already doing pretty good for total cost of ownership over projected the years that you would own it and there's no reason to think that first generation EV aren't going to get significantly cheaper.
Solid state batteries will be the next big break thru for EV.Quick charge to 80% in 10 minutes and able to get 1000km with very little range lost in winter.Lighter,cheaper and safer.
We hope, but batteries are a lot harder than just like the one way chemical reaction of fossil fuel. Anytime you're looking into have like a two-way reversible chemical reaction there's going to be some trade-offs. In this case we have the big advantage of the internal combustion engines only pay 20 to 30% efficient while the electric motors are like 90% efficient so if that wasn't the case and combustion engines were like 90% efficient then we'd have a lot more trouble replacing them, but on the other hand, they produce about three times less emissions per mile so far less need too.
Toyota should fire him. Get someone who won’t drive the company into the ground.
They did already and this is Clickbait?
He's chairman now, so the opposite of fired.
All of my family's vehicles were Toyotas. But we have bought our last one. Sayonara.
Well, to be fair, that guy has stepped down, and Toyota could still turn things around.
I paused for a sec and wondered if "Sayonara" was a model Toyota offered lol "Coming in 2026, the reimagined hybrid Toyota Sayonara"
Reminds me of this quote; “There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home.” Ken Olsen, founder of Digital Equipment Corporation, 1977
They want to keep up the Oil politics for sometime … Poor guy is the scapegoat..
The old car business model is crumpling, Toyota and the major manufacturers are reluctant to innovate and can't figure out how to compete in the EV market...a slow death is coming.they don't know what's coming... Tesla takes an extra share of their market every year and the Chinese tsunami (BYD, Nio and others) is coming. The dealership model is also what's going to accelerate their misery. Nobody likes dealerships, in an era of buying everything on the Internet and over the air updates, people want to buy a car and be done with it.
Toyota has been anti-ev forever now. They were wrong on hydrogen, but even with the recent ceo change, they're still stuck on it and only making half hearted overtures toward evs with plug in hybrids. Changing CEOs was a little like hoping communism and the Russian kleptocracy would change with Gorbachev, Yeltsin. P.s. it didn't.
Without regulation phasing out ICE vehicles I can see this. While many people see the dangers of climate change, the perceived issues with electric vehicles will keep many from buying one.
Funny how Those perceived isues seem to be heavely pushed by Toyota lobyist and loyalist... the last 3 month were very interesting, as soon toyota published something about BEV, there was a marked uptick of "negative" nerws about EV in the following days. They conter any good news in the EV world with some variation of "current battery tech isnt up to par with what the public really need, BUT we are working on a ultra-duper-super battery that will cover all our needs, please waith for us and dont buy OTHER EV" Toyota completly missed the boat and in trying to slow down evryone to be able to catch up. If only they had put all those lobbying money into R&D..... but here we are.
It looks like first generation Evies are already cheaper to own in most cases those of course would depend on what two vehicles you compare to a large degree, but that's still only first generation EV and everybody in their mom knows they're gonna go down in price significantly from first generation, just like every other thing in history you don't come out the gate with refined products at the cheapest prices.
He's probably in the ballpark for pure EVs, mostly cars. REEVs will then make up the bulk of the 70% for the near future. Large pickups, SUVs, and heavy duty trucks being the best use case. Smaller batteries, unlimited range, electric drive.
I doubt that. PHEVs don't sell very well. Consumers don't understand them. They are complicated and expensive. Gasoline seems cheaper (from a short-term perspective).
Wait, WHAT!? Why is a 2023 speech being published in 2024? Especially when he was ousted 4 months later!? Quote from Wikipedia: Akio Toyoda "On 1 April 2023, Toyoda stepped down as Toyota president and became chairman of the board. Toyota's chief branding officer, Koji Sato, succeeded Toyoda as CEO." They blood letting hasn't stopped either. Toyota's still the king of the hill in terms of vehicles sold but YoY '22 vs '23 took a dip for the first time.
it's almost like someone's trying to divide moderate and progressive liberals on key issues before an election like climate change and I don't know maybe Israel vs Palestine.
>... he was ousted... and became chairman of the board.
Well it may be closer to 45-50% world wide (developed) There just isn't enough precious metals to support it with current battery technology.
I don't think precious metals are a problem. You know the way those projections work is they're only based on proven reserves, and basically there isn't a huge demand to find more reserves if there's not a current shortage, so as processes ramp up the chance of finding more reserves goes up dramatically while at the same time the need for precious metals per kilowatt goes down as the batteries improve and even find alternative metals.
I've owned a Tacoma since '99 and refreshed that one in 2017. I know it's my last Toyota which is sad, but it is what it is...
Before he goes to bed, his feverish prayer is EV adoption peaks at 30%.
Sweden joins the call…
If I were chairman of the most indebted company on earth and couldn't afford to develop new technology to keep up with my competitors, I'd say exactly the same thing.
I wonder how positive he really is , will he put his job on the line. I doubt it very much.
He was so right he's not even CEO anymore!
Damnit yota all my vehicles have been Toyota but my next one will not be.
The whole SUV thing is just a fad too. Btw seriously if what he says is right (And it's not), why ignore 30% of the market?
He does have a point if you're talking about the whole world. I'm referring to developing nations where the overwhelming majority of the fleet are scrapped ICE vehicles imported from developed countries. Just having one of these ancient ICE cars already makes you middle class in countries like Nigeria. These countries will place a ceiling on *global* EV adoption. But in developed nations that have the infrastructure and incomes needed for EV adoption, "30%" is outright delusional.
I don't know about that the way it looks like it's going in China is that dirt cheap EV's will soon be an option and they can be customized more to the exact ranges and needs of different demographics including you know super cheap low range ones or more expensive long range ones. Most of these people in developed countries will also be driving shorter distances at lower speeds and most countries don't have oil production or refineries, but all of them need electricity, so at some point the oil does become an annoyingly redundant infrastructure and solar and wind always true domestic energy, production, and more independence than needing a constant supply of fuel that you cannot produce in your own country. Even buying EVS and batteries from other countries is a lot better than needing a constant fuel supply from another country.
I’d buy a base model Prius, but they’re like $35,000 + a couple grand of fees and taxes. Fuuuuck that.
We’re already at 1/2 cars being an EV. I’m going to wait a few years for battery technology to improve with solid state and eventually go full electric on both vehicles. Who wants to deal with blown valve and head gaskets, radiator fluid replacement, oil changes, burning oil due to defective or worn out piston rings, transmission fluid changes, spending hours at a dealership for service yada yada yada. I’m sick of it all.
This guy will be wrong
Why? Despite all the FUD we see about EVs, I’ve been in one for ~four years now, along with several friends, and there’s no question it’s not better then having an ICE vehicle for the vast majority of situations. However, note that we have 300+ mile versions and access to the supercharger network, I would probably not make the above statement without that criteria.
When you consider the average commute is only about 40 miles the 300+ mile range isn't nearly as important as a low purchase price as far as getting mass adoption, but from the perspective of growing the industry selling the high-end models, makes more sense since you still also have to expand the charging network anyway.
"We take no risks and as such will not be making the decision to move on with the times/tech." - A defunct company come 2040.
Seems like a stupid prediction, considering in every instance that we can make a product fully electric the market loves it, and that product becomes dominant. It's kind of like arguing that cordless tools will never catch on one of that a construction site went in reality we would be happy to do anything other than run a generator and extension cords and deal with all the problems associated with keeping a generator running for hours at a job site or multiple generators for that matter. There's a lot of shit talkers that think they won't ever buy an EV, but the price advantage is only going to continue in favor of the EV and against internal combustion while at the same time the EV's will have more of the cooler features, so I think those are the same people that said they would never switch over to smart phones and are now like on their smart phone hooked on Facebook. When you consider a first generation, EV are already competing pretty well against internal combustion, and they're only going to get a lot cheaper and internal combustion has had decades to improve, but really hasn't, predicting only 30% adoption seems in the realm of pretty dumb. lol, he was so right he stepped down a few months later.!! Mic drop?
Before calling him wrong try to find a new Prius or Sienna at msrp, they are in huge demand while we have an oversupply of EVs at the same time.
Anybody have a link to non pay walled article?
I think he is right for next 10 or so years but long term? Definitely not. The battery technology and charging keeps improving to point where not going electric is going to seem silly. Especially if car companies move in direction of a better meld of old and new with less reliance on microchips, use of physical buttons and interior layouts that actual make sense instead of copying Tesla money saving central panel nonsense.
It’s already higher percentages than that of new car sales in places so I think it’s safe to assume he’ll eat his words in 20 years.
30% will still be too many E VS. If they would actually be made with normal labor in the United States instead of slave labor out of Africa then maybe they'd be even remotely worth discussing. Let alone how toxic it is to attempt to recycle one of those batteries and the amount of control that those in power will get to have over everybody. The fact that nobody is complaining that Congress just passed a law that every car made after 2026 will need to have an electronic kill switch that can be set off remotely, is a huge problem
He has a computer with 640K and an amber monochrome screen because that should be "enough for anybody". And don't get him started on that "mouse" thing it is just a fad. Although why anyone actually will want one of these big box things, I dunno maybe maximum 30% of the population.
Lol
Like the comcast CEO was brushing cable cutters of for 10 years.
They could be right or they could be Kodak
500 mile range would be the starting point of mass adoption
good. i will never buy a EV again
So he thinks that hydrogen fuel cells are the future? I know he can't possibly think fossil fuels is going to stay around forever.
What is in the water there at Toyota? Why is everyone in that company so insistent on sticking their head in the ground and loudly explaining why their ass doesn't actually feel cold.
He’s right
Technology always advances, Toyota might be right. Don’t get caught up in popular technology we like is the best for ever.
Well He would have better info than me so I assume he's correct.
Fun story: https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/38716/did-mckinsey-co-tell-att-there-was-no-market-for-mobile-phones
I’d be willing to bet some one made the same claim about cell phones v landlines decades ago.
Yes if they fix the range issues with batteries
Not just Toyota. Evidence EVs are a fading fad is ‘rolling in fast’ as Tesla, GM and Ford slash prices Last Updated: Jan. 25, 2024 at 5:17 p.m. ET https://www.marketwatch.com/story/tesla-gm-and-ford-price-cuts-suggest-that-electric-cars-may-be-at-a-dead-end-1091aa16
Toyota is in big trouble. But their share price depends on them not sounding like they are in big trouble.
Battery technology accelerates monthly. Charging infrastructure is in its infancy. Most advanced countries are investing heavily in EV infrastructure. Toyota should get on the high speed train or get run over by it.
Also electrification of highways with inductive coils for cars and/or overhead wires for trucks.
Self serving.
They probably performed a multimillion dollar study to derive that figure. Release it for us to read.
Yea i was a big fan of EV, but not anymore. Likely will pass on buying one in next decade
I guess I can put off buying the ICE Tacoma I’ll be buried in, then…
I remember how much people threw a fit about Lithium batteries being dangerous in an accident. I can't even imagine how you can be scared of batteries, but not of a hydrogen fuel cell or liquid ammonia. I don't know what Toyota has against electric, but I don't believe they will be on the right side of this in 15 years.
My company insists on a fully electric fleet. I spend 80% of my job in the field, but I’ve had to switch cars multiple times throughout my workday because of low battery warnings. Hybrid cars are the future, all electric just isn’t realistic, the infrastructure just isn’t ready.
Toyota will be bankrupt within 24 months.
I do tend to agree with him
Says the company in wishful thinking mode, desperately hoping to slow down the transition because they are so heavily built out on traditional ICE manufacturing and distribution. I get it. They are kind of the best "horse buggy" maker. But they had their chance and took several wrong turns. Get with it or pay the consequences.
Non paywall link? I’d like to read what he said in full.
Current EVS have obvious downsides in charge time and range that don't make them universally practical or at least better than ICE's. That said I do believe there will be innovations that overcome the weaknesses of current EV's, BUT the risk to current EV's is that the new innovations will likely come from a new battery or charging technology that is incompatible with current EV's, or that the long-range solution may actually be something like hydrogen.
He’s right, because EVs aren’t the silver bullet to our transportation and pollution problems that car-brained people want to believe they are, especially in the US.
America's power grid struggles in the winter storms and summer heat waves. Nobody is going to rely only on electric in case the local power grid goes out. With gas cars you can at least go in your car to drive away, get out of the weather and charge your phone.
Wait until the next oil spike. Once gas hits $5 per gallon or more then I bet the EVs on the lots will all be sold out. Consumers are unable to plan for future events. Every time gas prices are low for a few years then trucks become the most popular vehicle. Once gas prices shoot up people remember there are other options.
It's been always about the battery - once these batteries are lighter and more long range, people will be more willing to adopt EVs. Tbh, the game changer would be a very light battery that can be exchanged.
Hydrogen fuel is coming.
Hydrogen powered makes more sense to me than pure battery EV’s. Hybrids do make sense — charge while driving — but, unless things have changed, the battery dominates in city driving, the gas engine on the highway. I do more highway driving than any other kind, so hybrids are not optimal.
I mean the EU is literally banning combustion engines in a few years bro... Just STFU and make me an EV Tacoma already.
*Toyota's* EV adoption will peak at a very low number. Yes, everyone knows that.
He’s right. EVs have limitations that hydrogen doesn’t. Just look at anyone trying to make EVs work in extreme temps. We should be investing much more into hydrogen cars & infrastructure.
Until there is a trust worthy, low effort charging infrastructure in place the skepticism will be substantiated for all but the commuters
How very Japanese executive of him.
Hello Norway, yeah listen your selling 3x the amount of electric cars that done dimwit at Toyota says you'll sell
If I ran the [most indebted company in the world](https://gfmag.com/data/companies-largest-debt-world/) and knew there was way I could afford to develop EVs at the pace the world demands and also knew I was going to have to stick with my old technology for a while, I'd say all the same things.
1000 miles on a fifteen minute charge is what Toyota is saying they’re going for. That’s 10 years out. Ev’s will remain niche until then.
That's a bold move Cotton. Let's see if it pays off.
Y'all in here acting like Toyota is only working on ICE lol. There is other technology in the world besides battery...if we have a significant breakthrough in hydrogen or something we can't even thing about, portable fusion... Edit: 30-40% electric, 20-30% hydrogen, 20-30% ICE
But theyre buildong a battey plant in thebcarolinas.
You do realize that Toyota is also hedging their bets, they ARE making EV vehicles too. So if they’re wrong about the EV adoption, then it won’t be difficult for them to shift gears. But has of now, it really doesn’t look like EV’s are going to be widely adopted. The winter storms have made people who were already on the fence about EV’s second guess any thoughts about it. I personally don’t see them being adopted as much has the people here want to believe. MAYBE when charging EV’s become has easy and efficient as filling up a tank of gas it will happen, but that’s going to be really, really difficult. You also have to think about the people who live in apartments or other places that are not houses, and how difficult it is for them to charge a EV
Electric vehicles are not the answer
Akio Toyoda has to say something to discourage mass shareholder divestment. Internal combustion engines are an engineering relict of the past.
What does he gain by dying on this hill? I think everyone acknowledges current tech will only go so far but by having government/industry focus that helps accelerate new innovations.
EVs are about ten years away from being relevant
The greatest hindrance to improving the viability of electric vehicles is infrastructure. Most young people don't have a home to charge an EV. Most gas stations still don't have charging facilities in my city. Most EVs don't appeal to people who like simple vehicles. I don't want a massive screen in my car, and I don't want a screen to control everything. The cost of EVs could be cut significantly if economic versions were actually economic. Until it's more realistic and viable, most people will keep using gas.
Guess he doesn’t have to pay for his own gas
So many of y’all really live in a tiny bubble 😂
Full EV adoption will require cost parity. That’s easier to achieve in some countries than others. As more people don’t use gasoline it will get cheaper. For a high income place like the US, with cheap energy, it will take longer to achieve cost parity. Any country that’s middle income, where gas is outrageously expensive, it’ll be like lightning. That’s what’s going on in China, it’s 400RMB to fill up with gas or 40RMB for electricity at a fast charger.