business

Investors chide Toyota chief for questioning combustion car ban

58 Comments
By Aaron Sheldrick

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Thomson Reuters 2021.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

58 Comments
Login to comment

Well said guys.

Toyoda bet on a horse but it ran the wrong way (Dylan) when Toyota supported Trump's legal action against California's new clean automobile legislation. Guess who won that battle.

Then Toyoda had the gall to say clean auto policy "broke his business model". A reasonable response would be for the shareholders to fire a CEO who was so out of touch.

7 ( +13 / -6 )

Three days later though, in his capacity as head of the Japanese automobile Manufacturers Association, Toyoda questioned the country's decision to ban new internal combustion engined vehicles....

Typical backtracking by Japanese leaders because of tatemae. They say things initially to please the listeners without ever meaning it. Just look at Abe and his promise to purchase corn from Trump.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

There’s no hard scientific evidence that CO2 contributes to “global warming”, the term that has recently been replaced by more ambiguous “climate change.”

-4 ( +12 / -16 )

There’s no hard scientific evidence that CO2 contributes to “global warming”

Should be read

There are hard scientific evidence that CO2 contributes to “global warming”

0 ( +10 / -10 )

There’s no hard scientific evidence that CO2 contributes to “global warming”, the term that has recently been replaced by more ambiguous “climate change.”

Oh, there is climate change alright; it has been happening for millennia if not aeons.

But deprive the doom-mongers of their grievance and you will be sorry.

There are hard scientific evidence that CO2 contributes to “global warming”

Citations, please.

-2 ( +9 / -11 )

Just because Japanese pols say a "target" has been set does not mean they take it seriously.

Remember the past Kyoto Protocol targets, targets on bullying, target on women in management, target on women in government, target on political finanacing reform, target on ending childhood poverty, target on restructuring employment to end contract to full time, target on Fukushima water clean up, target on elderly care, ...

None met.

Believe this target as much.

16 ( +16 / -0 )

Japan doesnt has many factors that does not create a breeding ground for innovative technology as electric vehicles. The country has missed the digital revolution and already puts them behind almost every country in the world, including developing countries. It also has the factor of natural disasters that requires infrastructure that can sustain a society in times of no electricity. Finally, the nail in the coffin is its power grid. Europe and North America have integrative power grids allow the transfer of power from one region to the next. When one is raining but needs power. when sunlight is available but still dark, or in times of disaster areas to transfer power to another area. Japan has two grids; Kansai and Tohoku that are not interconnected and hence the blackouts during 3/11 when Kansai had excess power. Japan has deep rooted problems it needs to fix before it can implement electric vehicles. But like many of its industries, Japan is set to fail for next 30-40 years. The train has passed.

12 ( +14 / -2 )

The largest amount of CO2 is from volcanoes under the sea and on the land. The CO2 agenda is just a scam to line the pockets of certain entities.

1 ( +11 / -10 )

CO2 Economy is like communism; it should work in theory if administer properly. But corruption and politics prevail that eventually makes it to become a tax grab. People in developed worlds dont realize that with all the taxes, hidden taxes, stealth taxes, and taxes on taxes; that you have less than 50% for every dollar you earn. Most of hardship in life is caused by the governments we serve.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

Do we know for sure if this combustion is relevant to electric cars only or to make electricity for homes. And, you know, what about businesses who deliver? This problem is something we should consider carefully and it go either way, as long as the country agrees.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Most of hardship in life is caused by the governments we serve.

Government is supposed to serve its people!

The pressure to lower emissions is a globalist scam.

Remove their influence.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

The Danish fund told Reuters last month that it would consider a shareholder resolution or sell its holding in Toyota if there was no change after "intense" engagement with the company.

LOL, what is this guy smoking? Guy you don't have the kind of muscle.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

I support moves to a lower carbon economy but am skeptical whether a ban on new ICE cars from 2035 would be workable with the typical bumbling of the Japanese government. This would mean lots of changes to the grid and massive rollout of charging infrastructure, all without coal (otherwise it's pointless) or nuclear-derived electricity. The electric cars on the road already are the lowest hanging fruit, belonging to pro-EV people who have homes with off-road chargers they were probably subsidized to install. Far greater problems exist in getting the majority of drivers in less favourable situations into EVs.

This leaves the question of how much effort companies like Toyota should make in transforming their business to suit something which is unlikely to happen.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Just bought a Toyota car. I will remove all badges out of guilt.

really want an electric car, but my price range is second hand.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

@Bungle

Citations, please.

Of course

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305672059_CO2_the_greenhouse_effect_and_global_warming_From_the_pioneering_work_of_Arrhenius_and_Callendar_to_today's_Earth_System_Models

https://climateextremes.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/WCRP_ECS_Final_manuscript_2019RG000678R_FINAL_200720.pdf

https://climatefeedback.org/claimreview/scientific-studies-established-clear-links-between-human-caused-increased-in-atmospheric-co2-and-global-warming-patrick-moore/

Might as well want some citations on why the earth is not flat?

1 ( +4 / -3 )

I'm saving up to buy a Toyota Supra SZ-R.

Needless to say, I have little regard for carbon neutrality, global warning, climate change or whatever buzzwords "they" happen to be using.

LOL

-6 ( +4 / -10 )

Electric cars are a scam!

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

Electric cars are still cars, and as such are not the solution to the world's problems. They still have to be manufactured and powered, all wasting this planet's precious resources. And electric cars are heavier than standard cars, meaning more wear-and-tear on the tyres and thus more plastic micro-particles in the air.

The solution is public transport, and road networks - especially in cities - designed for pedestrians and bicycles.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Electric cars are a scam!

I disagree; in itself, the tech is fantastic, but they are not the panacea the eco crowd make them out to be.

The ecological solution would be to get rid of cars altogether. Now here is my Nobel, Greta?

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

I'm all for CO2 reduction and phasing out gasoline cars, but discussions like this never mention the cost to environmental damage of lithium mining. Electric cars are not the answer, it's just the new fad of corporations-funded lobbying to mass social engineer people to think it's "environmentally friendly", when in reality they just shift the dirty stuffs away from the public's eyes (which historically proven to work really well, e.g. dumping trash in landfill, outsourcing dirty industries to poor countries, American wars on foreign soils, etc.).

1 ( +3 / -2 )

@Auxchanel

Your sources are unreliable: see "Key study by East Anglia professor Phil Jones was based on suspect figures"

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/feb/01/leaked-emails-climate-jones-chinese

Now I wouldn't normally consider El Graun a reliable source, either, but proponents of climate change tend to herald from the political left.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

The real concern by these shareholders isn't climate change per se but rather the fact that Toyota is just plain falling behind its competitors.

The world is clearly moving towards electric vehicles regardless of what Toyota's current leadership wants. Current estimates are that by the middle of this decade the cost of producing electric cars will be the same as ICE cars, and by the end of the decade they will be cheaper as economies of scale push costs down. Given the other benefits of electric cars (longer lifespans, lower maintenance costs, cheaper energy costs, etc), even without government regulations ICE cars are just not going to be competetive with electric ones in about a decade.

Toyota is like a company in 1910 that is trying to keep its horse drawn carriage division running because it was stupid enough to invest all its R&D into producing a new kind of harness for the horses that was 10% more efficient than older harnesses. Meanwhile its competitors who instead invested in developing the automobile are about to take off and dominate the new market, but because Toyota's CEO has staked his reputation on the future of harness technology he is personally incentivized to fight tooth and nail to keep the market for harnesses alive for as long as he can, regardless of whether it makes sense for the company or not. Its kind of pathetic.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

"Toyota is like a company in 1910 that is trying to keep its horse drawn carriage division running because it was stupid enough to invest all its R&D into producing a new kind of harness for the horses that was 10% more efficient than older harnesses"

Do you mean like this:

Toyota's game-changing solid-state battery en route for 2021 debut

https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Most-read-in-2020/Toyota-s-game-changing-solid-state-battery-en-route-for-2021-debut

Not bad for 1910 company. LOL

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

I'm all for CO2 reduction and phasing out gasoline cars, but discussions like this never mention the cost to environmental damage of lithium mining.

That's why buzzwords like "carbon neutral" and "zero net carbon" are bunk meant to pull the wool over the eyes of gullible people.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

As much as I support finding an alternative to internal combustion engines, the present electric technology for electric cars is far from ready to replace them.

Sure if you live in a warm climate, a city, gave your own parking with charging station, then they are great.

Long distance, getting better.

But live in northern Hokkaido, Canada, the USA, etc.. where heavy winter sets in and the weaknesses of these electric cars quickly become apparent.

In the lower minus temperatures if the vehicle is not constantly plugged and charging the batteries will deplete if left in the cold, leading to suddenly running out of power quickly.

The electric powertrains are often not powerful enough to handle roads that haven't been cleared of snow and ice.

Untill these problems are worked out universal e-cars will not be of use in many locations.

Then we take remote areas like norther Canada many parts of Asi, Africa and the outback of Australia, where drivers need to carry extra fuel tanks in order to travel because not gas stations are available during their run. This will not be possible with electric cars or trucks.

So as usual something on paper looks great and often done by people living in nice clean cities with plenty of public transportation and rarely travel more than a few hundred Kilometers from home and when they do it is for a vacation.

This is reality note something on paper by some city living first worlder.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Not bad for 1910 company. LOL

Yes, I didn't mean that Toyota was literally a horse and buggy company, its clearly doing some research. But the fact is that it has fallen behind its rivals (it doesn't have any Electric vehicles in its lineup and won't for several years) and part of this is because most of its R&D hasn't been in electric but rather hydrogen and hybrids, which are looking like they will lose the race with EVs to become the standard (like Beta losing the race with VHS for those old enough to remember the 80s). This is the sort of thing that is pissing shareholders off. Toyota could have been well poised to dominate the EV market if it had made different decisions 15 years ago, but now its just playing a delaying action to try to squeeze some more life out of its ICE production because it has a competetive advantage in those now, which it will lose when the market shifts to EVs.

In short, the 100s of billions of dollars in market capitalization enjoyed by Tesla now could have been Toyota's, but it isn't.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Many Teslas do 4-5km per kW. In thermal terms, that is the equivalent of around 30 to 35km/l for gasoline. However, and its a big one, if that one kW of electricity is generated from fossil fuel, its generation is 30 to 40% efficient, with further transmission and charging losses to get the juice into the car. This means a Tesla running on electricity generated from oil or nat gas is no more efficient than most ICE cars and below one of Toyota's hybrids.

The value from EVs comes when you have grid power close to 100% renewable, which has happened in Norway, home of these shareholders pressurizing Toyota, but is a long way off here in Japan. The target for renewable electricity in Japan for 2030 is only 24%. In that situation, it seems foolish to ban ICE cars (including hybrids) just so folks can drive around using fossil-fuel generated electricity.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Toyota is like a company in 1910 that is trying to keep its horse drawn carriage division running because it was stupid enough to invest all its R&D into producing a new kind of harness for the horses that was 10% more efficient than older harnesses"

Actually no,

Cars were easily proven more powerful, practical than horses.

The horse breeders resisted but carriage makers converted to making car bodies/frames.

The difference here is that electric vehicles are not more powerful, they cannot trav6the same distances on a single charge as a full tank of gas, they cannot and do not do well in very cold climates, or in very hot climates, etc..

So telling the car makers to just convert to electric cars is not as simple as creating a new law.

If the makers cars cannot handle winter, long distances without charging stations, high temperatures, etc..

Then it is the makers that have to deal with the problems.

Technology does not suddenly changed because some city dwellers and politicians tell it to.

I have traveled in parts of Canada where to get to these towns you need to carry spare fuel, I have done the same in multiple places in Africa and know the same happens in Australia.

So how does one carry spare fuel for and electric car that usually cannot at present travel the same distance on a single charge as most gasoline cars on a single tank?

Again Tokyo, New York, Paris, London, etc.. are not the world and not how much of the world live like.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Sure if you live in a warm climate, a city, gave your own parking with charging station, then they are great.

Well, 91% of Japan's population live in cities, and about the same proportion live in a warm climate.

But live in northern Hokkaido, Canada, the USA, etc.. where heavy winter sets in and the weaknesses of these electric cars quickly become apparent.

In the lower minus temperatures if the vehicle is not constantly plugged and charging the batteries will deplete if left in the cold, leading to suddenly running out of power quickly.

Its the same with conventional engines, whose batteries have to be plugged in during the winter to prevent them from depleting in the cold too, isn't it? I've never owned an EV so I don't know from personal experience, but I have owned an ICE car in a Canadian winter and they just won't start in the morning on really cold days if they haven't been plugged in.

Then we take remote areas like norther Canada many parts of Asi, Africa and the outback of Australia, where drivers need to carry extra fuel tanks in order to travel because not gas stations are available during their run. This will not be possible with electric cars or trucks.

So they can carry extra fuel tanks, but carrying an extra battery is impossible? Seems like this is something which is eminently solve-able.

So as usual something on paper looks great and often done by people living in nice clean cities with plenty of public transportation and rarely travel more than a few hundred Kilometers from home and when they do it is for a vacation.

Well, yeah but that describes the vast majority of the population in the developed world where the vast majority of the cars in the world are driven.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

@Bungle

You say my sources are unreliable, where I cited three independent, non-related between them studies, from different countries and institutions.

And, even in your own linked article states that "The revelations on the inadequacies of the 1990 paper do not undermine the case that humans are causing climate change".

The good thing about science is that anyone can replicate and backtest the numerous studies out there. Of course, different minds can have different conclusions, but the data is the data and the math is the math.

As clear as global warming is caused by our industrialization.

Now, you can argue if we should do something about it, or how deep we should go into fixing that issue, as economics are also at stake. That's totally valid.

But climate change and global warming has no political sides. It either exists, or not. And it does.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

@rainyday

No one plugs in their ICE car battery unless it needs changing and that you do with a battery charger.

They may use a block heater that keeps the oil warm making starting the engine easier.

Worst comes to worse you use anoth battery/car to jumpstart the engine.

Then you obviously do not understand how electric vehicles work, No you cannot Carry spare batteries, these are not the small 12 volt batteries like in an ICE vehicle.

You do realise that the vast majority of those in cities do not have a parking space of their own and in Japan rent parking and few if any have electrical outlets, if you are from Canada or most of North America you would know a lager portion of car owners park on the streets, so again no charging ( thus why everyone I know in Canada has booster cables in their cars.

But as I can clearly see, only what the city people care, and developed countries say matters to heck with those living in remote area, and less developed countries, at least that is how it sounds.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

No one plugs in their ICE car battery unless it needs changing and that you do with a battery charger.

You've never lived in Canada, have you?

Then you obviously do not understand how electric vehicles work, No you cannot Carry spare batteries, these are not the small 12 volt batteries like in an ICE vehicle.

My point isn't that a guy in the Australian outback who needs to drive 700KM every time he needs to buy toilet paper or whatever is literally going to be expected to buy one of today's Teslas and then strap a massive and expensive second Tesla battery to the roof of his car. My point is that by the time ICE cars are out the window like 15-20 years from now the range limitations which affect them now and are an issue for people in rural areas are extremely unlikely to still be a problem.

The newer models even today have way greater range than they did just a few years ago. Maybe the standard city model won't be ideal, but they'll have (and are already developing) models for those who need to make longer drives regularly. Its no different from the fact that a pick up truck today which can carry jerry cans full of gas is way more suitable than a four door sedan for such people.

You do realise that the vast majority of those in cities do not have a parking space of their own 

Yeah, those are the people who don't own cars anyway.

and in Japan rent parking and few if any have electrical outlets Canada or most of North America you would know a lager portion of car owners park on the streets, so again no charging ( thus why everyone I know in Canada has booster cables in their cars.

Yeah, I'm not saying all the infrastructure is just going to magically appear, but equipping parking spaces with electrical outlets is something that is actually do-able.

I'm sure similar arguments were raised against the ICE when it was first introduced ("Hey, where are they going to get the gas for these things, everybody parks their horse carriages in barns that don' t have gas pumps" etc), but all of these things you are citing are problems that have solutions.

But as I can clearly see, only what the city people care, and developed countries say matters to heck with those living in remote area, and less developed countries, at least that is how it sounds.

Well, to reverse that why should the vast majority of car drivers in the world today, who do live in cities, be saddled with an inferior and more costly technology just because what is available RIGHT NOW THIS INSTANT isn't so great for people with extremely different driving needs in the countryside who can still buy ICE cars until the technological and infrastructure problems that exist RIGHT NOW are likely to be solved anyway. I wouldn't expect everyone in the Australian outback to just immediately buy a Tesla, it'll obviously take longer for the vehicles and infrastructure to reach the point where it works for them but there aren't any obstacles which make it impossible.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Actually no,

Cars were easily proven more powerful, practical than horses.

Its not a question of power per se, its which is the better technology.

The horse breeders resisted but carriage makers converted to making car bodies/frames.

Interesting.

The difference here is that electric vehicles are not more powerful, they cannot trav6the same distances on a single charge as a full tank of gas, they cannot and do not do well in very cold climates, or in very hot climates, etc..

Well one could have framed arguments against automobiles in their state of development in say 1895 (or whenever, I'm not an expert in automobile history) to prove their inferiority to horses to make the point that we should stick with horses, but it would have been an equally misleading comparison. Yes, the technology behind EVs is still being developed and yes, the technology that exists right now isn't ideal and suffers from issues that ICE cars don't.

But there are clear solutions to most of those problems and EVs have some massive potential advantages in comparison with ICEs, which is a technology which has limited room for further development (diminishing returns on R&D have long set in).

So telling the car makers to just convert to electric cars is not as simple as creating a new law.

True.

If the makers cars cannot handle winter, long distances without charging stations, high temperatures, etc..

Then it is the makers that have to deal with the problems.

Yup, and they are dealing with it. If they demanded automakers stop producing ICEs today and only sell EVs that would be very bad policy since they aren't ready. But the time frames being discussed (by 2035-ish) seem to give an eminently reasonable amount of time for these issues and infrastructure to be dealt with.

Technology does not suddenly changed because some city dwellers and politicians tell it to.

Correct, it does not.

I have traveled in parts of Canada where to get to these towns you need to carry spare fuel, I have done the same in multiple places in Africa and know the same happens in Australia.

So how does one carry spare fuel for and electric car that usually cannot at present travel the same distance on a single charge as most gasoline cars on a single tank?

Again Tokyo, New York, Paris, London, etc.. are not the world and not how much of the world live like.

I grew up mostly in rural Ontario. In my youth I also spent four years in the Canadian army where a large part of my job consisted of driving military vehicles in the middle of a wilderness that was frozen almost half the year. I have had the pleasure of refilling tanks from jerry cans filled with either diesel or gas (depending on the vehicle) in the middle of nowhere in minus 30 degree weather at 3AM on numerous occasions.

So I'm much more aware than most of all this stuff you are talking about despite the fact that yes, I do live in a city today. Again though, none of these problems you are citing seem insurmountable to me so I don't logically see why everybody in the world needs to keep using ICE vehicles because of them.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

You've never lived in Canada, have you?

Born and raised in Canada, also did my own mechanical work on my cars.

Obviously you never did any work on a car.

Did you actually think you were plugin in the car battery at night in winter?

No you plug in a block heater ( look it up).

The rest of what you wrote makes about as much sense as thinking you were plugging in your car battery and not a block heater!

Just to help those that did not growup in Canada.

A block heater consists of 2 types, one cheaper simpler type is a heating element inserted that keeps the oil warm, the other circulates and heats the engine coolant.

This makes it easier to start the car on very cold days.

No one keeps their battery on a charger no one plugs in their battery as a plug is 120 Volts AC and a battery is 12 volts DC you need a charger.

And when a battery gets to low because of the cold people use another car or battery with booster cables and jump start their cars.

Any real Canadian should know these Facts.

Only about 15% of Canadians use public transport daily ( stats Canada)

Only about 30% have viable access ( again stats Canada) viable means practical for everyday use and accessibility. In other words the long commuter train that then require a car to get home from the station is not seen a viable daily public transportation.

It is this disconnect from how non central city people live and think that is the problem.

You look at Japan and say great public transportation, but there are only one or 2 buses an hour near my wife's family town in Niigata and they end very early thus why every family have multiple cars. Heavy snowfall is normal, etc...and that is nothing compared to living in Hokkaido.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Electric cars charged by electricity generated from oil or coal driven power stations..........yeah very clever ..............given that the mining to get the rare earth in these cars is not very environmentally friendly , the weight of the battterys make these silly things heavier too......i see many are still swallowing this eco nonsense. Production of these electic cars is alone not very eco friendly, but hey we can drive down the road thinking we are doing our bit to save the planet.

A well tuned properly driven gasoline engine will be more eco friendly over its life span than your electric whirring pretend we are saving the planet stupidity thing all day everyday.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Born and raised in Canada, also did my own mechanical work on my cars.

Obviously you never did any work on a car.

Did you actually think you were plugin in the car battery at night in winter?

No you plug in a block heater ( look it up).

The rest of what you wrote makes about as much sense as thinking you were plugging in your car battery and not a block heater!

Just to help those that did not growup in Canada.

A block heater consists of 2 types, one cheaper simpler type is a heating element inserted that keeps the oil warm, the other circulates and heats the engine coolant.

This makes it easier to start the car on very cold days.

No one keeps their battery on a charger no one plugs in their battery as a plug is 120 Volts AC and a battery is 12 volts DC you need a charger.

And when a battery gets to low because of the cold people use another car or battery with booster cables and jump start their cars.

Any real Canadian should know these Facts.

Cool stuff. In other words, your car has a plug that hangs out the front and you stick it into a socket in the winter, yes?

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Only about 30% have viable access ( again stats Canada) viable means practical for everyday use and accessibility. In other words the long commuter train that then require a car to get home from the station is not seen a viable daily public transportation.

It is this disconnect from how non central city people live and think that is the problem.

Its the assumption that all these issues which, yes, exist today are an inevitable and insurmountable feature of EVs, which I believe they are not.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Cool stuff. In other words, your car has a plug that hangs out the front and you stick it into a socket in the winter, yes?

Yes if you had a parking space with access!

Do/did you think that plug was charging the battery?

No it is an engine heater.

A cold dead battery can only start a car if recharged by a charger, or the car being started by another battery via boosting.

Search and rescue from Northern Quebec into Nunavut, we had to maintain our own vehicles from Snowmobiles, ATV to boats. ( Flying mechanical left to the real experts).

I will be interested to see how they replace ATV and Snowmobiles with electric and how the people of the north will be expected to charge then out on the ice and Tundra.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Do/did you think that plug was charging the battery?

I have no idea. I just drove the things, I don't know how they work on the inside.

Search and rescue from Northern Quebec into Nunavut, we had to maintain our own vehicles from Snowmobiles, ATV to boats. ( Flying mechanical left to the real experts).

Very nice. In the army we had mechanics for that.

I'm not sure how this is relevant though, the global automobile fleet does not need to be made to the standards necessary to operate in Northern Canada in January.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

@rainyday

You like others that think now is the time to go all electric make a lot of assumptions that somehow solutions will be found by the time things are needed.

It usually doesn't work that way.

History has plenty of examples the best is nuclear power, it was assumed that eventually a solution from nuclear waste would be found but here we are decades later and the only "solution" is still to bury it in underground storage!

1 ( +3 / -2 )

You like others that think now is the time to go all electric make a lot of assumptions that somehow solutions will be found by the time things are needed.

Well, give me a problem with them that doesn't have a solution and maybe I'll be persuaded. All of the things you are mentioning seem to have known solutions.

It usually doesn't work that way.

History has plenty of examples the best is nuclear power, it was assumed that eventually a solution from nuclear waste would be found but here we are decades later and the only "solution" is still to bury it in underground storage!

So because some stuff in the past hasn't worked well, we can assume that all new stuff won't work too?

Not sure that I buy that, especially given that we are having this conversation using computers (stuff that works) which send signals via cables (stuff that works) to the internet (stuff that works), etc etc.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

There seems to be this silly belief that car companies are so stuck to ICE vehicle that they don't want to change.

These are businesses those running them understand that the first one to come up with a practical and viable environmentally better solution to ICE will make billions.

The fact none has should make it quite obvious at this point none has actually found a truly viable alternative.

We keep hearing about Tesla but even they cannot deliver much of what they promised because the technology and resources/need materials in the quality needed are just not available.

I get this type of thing all the time, people that do not understand what the work of do consists of and want their orders done faster than is possible not because I don't want to but because the methods use the material used and it is just not possible due to technology, physics and chemistry.

Would I like it to take a week instead of 2 to 3 months? You bet I would but unless someone figures out how to change the laws of physics and chemical reactions that is not likely going to happen.

My sister has a degree in environmental studies, not technology and trying to explain to her that what she wants and what is technically, laws of physics, and chemistry is like talking to a brick she doesn't get it understand it and just keeps repeating someone should be working on changing things.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

@rainyday

Again.

Do you think when the idea of the first car came up they said great it runs "we will figure out how to stop it later"? No before they produced the first car they figured out how to steer and stop it.

Most things work that way.

When it doesn't that is when there are problems.

They didn't build the Shinkansen system before figuring out how to stabilise it from flipping over in the event of and earthquake and derailment or how to stop the vibration from causing the rails to loosen.

No they had to figure out all the possible problems and technology before going ahead.

The old expression of putting the cart before the horse should ring a few bells.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

There seems to be this silly belief that car companies are so stuck to ICE vehicle that they don't want to change.

That would be a silly belief. But the criticism of Toyota (not car companies generally) is that they've made poor investments relative to their competitors (who are themselves car companies).

These are businesses those running them understand that the first one to come up with a practical and viable environmentally better solution to ICE will make billions.

Yes, this is why shareholders are upset with Toyota.

Tesla market capitalization today: 605 billion US$

Toyota market capitalization today: 216 billion US $

Just a few years back Toyota was the one in the lead (by far).

We keep hearing about Tesla but even they cannot deliver much of what they promised because the technology and resources/need materials in the quality needed are just not available.

Yup, Tesla has over-promised and under-delivered for most of its existence. But it is delivering now and the markets, which value companies mainly based on expected future cash flows and risk, are being heavily convinced that it has something. Investors aren't the best judges of engineering questions to be sure, but other car companies which have loads of engineers are following suit which suggests to me that they believe these things will be available. They have to move huge supply chains to make shifts like this (I don't know what the pluggy thing on the front of cars connects to, but I do know how large corporations are governed) and wouldn't be doing so at this scale if they deemed it impossible.

My sister has a degree in environmental studies, not technology and trying to explain to her that what she wants and what is technically, laws of physics, and chemistry is like talking to a brick she doesn't get it understand it and just keeps repeating someone should be working on changing things.

I have several degrees which are unrelated to technology, but you still haven't identified anything which fundamentally will prevent EVs from working. You have identified problems with infrastucture, with range and with cold weather, but these all seem to be surmountable problems. Its not the same as nuclear waste where they were just pushing off tough problems for future generations either, these are problems where they have already developed solutions (at least according to the stuff I've read, admittedly by a non-technologically inclined though scientifically literate person).

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Tesla market capitalization today: 605 billion US$

Toyota market capitalization today: 216 billion US $

Tesla net income $721 million

Toyota net income $18 billion

Seems like Tesla's capitalisation may be a bit over stated or poorly managed.

Or is it that the market is just not ready for what Tesla is selling because the technology has far to many problems needing to be worked out and the infrastructure isn't available.

Again you build something then say " we will work out how to fix the downsides later" but buy it now!

Then wonder why people aren't going for it.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Its not the same as nuclear waste where they were just pushing off tough problems for future generations either, these are problems where they have already developed solutions

Really, what solutions have they found for rare earth minerals and their toxicity, the dangers to the environment, safety in recycling them?

Very few, lots of talk no real solutions but a lot of "we have ideas" and " we are looking into it".

The main problem is people can see the car exhaust and think pollution but they don't see it on a so-called zero emissions car and think "zero" great! In fact the massive amounts of rare earth causes massive emissions, on top of other serious problems. In much of the world including Japan, coal, oil, in producing the needed electrify.

But unseen and marketing using zero emissions give the impression that people like. Oh and let's not forget all the petroleum base products use in building those zero cars.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

You have only questions and zero knowledge or answers? That can be helped. Just read some really old books, written by Newton or even better, by a very educated lady with the name Émilie du Châtelet , who lived 1706-1749 and commented on Newton’s ‘Principae’ for example, and had already alone , although died early and young in her beginning forties, much more knowledge and intelligence than all worldwide discussion participants on those topics nowadays have combined.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

The guy in the Aussie outback ticks the solar roof option when he buys his car.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Seems like Tesla's capitalisation may be a bit over stated or poorly managed.

Very possibly. I just offered it up as evidence for why shareholders (like those in the article) are mad with Toyota and not for the wisdom of their valuation per se. They may very well be proven wrong.

Again you build something then say " we will work out how to fix the downsides later" but buy it now!

Yeah but in terms of functionality at least (which is how you were framing your objections earlier) electric vehicles are here and work now, in a few countries (like Scandinavia) they already make up a large proportion of vehicles on the road. Stuff like a lack of charging stations and range concerns are things which they already have solutions to and don't need to rely on future technological breakthroughs to make happen.

Really, what solutions have they found for rare earth minerals and their toxicity, the dangers to the environment, safety in recycling them?

Fair point, I don't know. If you are framing it in terms of its environmental impacts (in contrast to simply the question of whether EV cars work) I agree there are a lot of serious concerns. There is an obvious decision about the environmental trade off that is going to have to be made which weighs the impact of burning fossil fuels and other environmental costs of ICEs on the one hand with the impact of using EVs, which have those waste disposal issues, the impact of mining those minerals they use in the first place, and whatever CO2 emissions are created in their manufacture and in producing the electricity they use.

Both of these options have serious environmental drawbacks, and EVs obviously only make sense from a climate change perspective if their roll out goes hand in hand with decarbonization of the grids where they are used. And yes I agree that some of these issues are that "kick the can down the road for someone else to deal with" type of thing similar to nuclear waste disposal. But given the serious problems associated with business as usual I don't think these concerns justify dropping the technology (if that is your argument, its a bit unclear what your position on EVs is other than general skepticism. Do we abandon them and stick with ICEs and destroy the climate? Or what?).

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

The guy in the Aussie outback ticks the solar roof option when he buys his car.

Any idea how big solar panels would have to be to charge an electric car?

Even if the entire roof of a van was fully covered with solar panels it would still take days or more to fully charge a EV vehicle's battery pack and only if the vehicle is full stationery and not running.

Now I am no electrical expert but have built solar power devices.

A typical EV vehicle's battery pack is 60Kwh

At 7Kwh it would take 8 hrs to fully charge.

A 2.4 metre by 1.4 metre one of the largest single panels ( and crazy expensive) does 670 Wh but more available is 500 Wh.

At 500Wh it would take appropriately 120 hours to charge a Nissan leaf.

One would need at least 10 500Wh panels each being around 2 metres by 1.3 metres to charge a Leaf in a day and only if a full sun is out.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Church of England Pensions Board

Why does a religion go investing with state money?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

rainyday

I have several degrees which are unrelated to technology,

Could be the problem right there !!

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Could be the problem right there !!

I really did walk right into that one, didn’t I?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

People in developed worlds dont realize that with all the taxes, hidden taxes, stealth taxes, and taxes on taxes; that you have less than 50% for every dollar you earn. Most of hardship in life is caused by the governments we serve.

Because your statement is simply not true. Tax burden is usually defined as government revenues from all sources, meaning all the different "hidden" taxes you allude to, total revenue as a percentage of GDP. Both are easy and reliably quantified. It it not a particular tax rate or anything like that. It is straight up, this is what government at all levels took in as revenue, every Yen, Dollar or Euro they collected from every source as a percent of the nation's GDP. It's a number that cannot be fudged. On the link below scroll down to page 4 of the pdf to see the data for each nation. The OECD average tax burden is 33.8% of GDP, far below the 50% or more you claim governments take.

The tax burden for the US, meaning local state and Federal revenues from all sources is 24.5% of GDP. That of Japan is 32% of GDP. You can see the only nations in the OECD with lower tax burdens than the US are Ireland, Colombia, Chile, Mexico and Turkey. You will also note that no OECD member nation has a tax burden over 50% though some Scandinavian nations have tax burdens in the 40 something percent. Your claim is simply not backed by the facts.

https://www.oecd.org/tax/tax-policy/revenue-statistics-highlights-brochure.pdf

1 ( +1 / -0 )

So if internal combustion engines are banned outright, what happens to ammonia or hydrogen powered cars, trucks and busses? These are adaptations of existing gasoline and diesel engines tuned to run on these clean burning fuels. I think it is crazy to just ban them outright. Battery electric power will not work in every application such as long haul trucking or for people living in rural areas of the US, Canada and Australia for example.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Really, what solutions have they found for rare earth minerals and their toxicity, the dangers to the environment, safety in recycling them?

Rare earth metals are abundant. There is no shortage of them anywhere. What happened is that Chinese state run enterprises undercut the prices of the rest of the worlds mines and captured that market. But it is not a case of China sitting on all of the worlds supply. If the price rises there are lots and lots of places that have these metals waiting to be mined. Or, alternatively if for example the US Government decided to subsidize their extraction there are plenty of these metals in California and Nevada. Australia too.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

One would need at least 10 500Wh panels each being around 2 metres by 1.3 metres to charge a Leaf in a day and only if a full sun is out.

Are you aware that for decades there has been a competition each Austral summer in the Australian outback, a race among solar powered cars. It is called the World Solar Challenge. The first such race was in 1987. I saw part of the 1991 race while riding my motorcycle around Australia. The cars started out feather light with jockey sized drivers but the current racers are more like family cars with multiple seats and are the size of small SUVs. Tires remain skinny and hard, compromises from what we are accustomed to in a "normal" car abound the but the tech is getting to the point where solar can at least supplement the batteries for longer drives.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I'm saving up to buy a Toyota Supra SZ-R.

Needless to say, I have little regard for carbon neutrality, global warning, climate change or whatever buzzwords "they" happen to be using.

BASED.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites