2015 Toyota and Honda Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles Expected to Be Priced at $97,750 – Yikes!!!


A Tesla Model S or a Honda or Toyota fuel cell electric vehicle?  What’ll it be?

Toyota FCEV Concept

Toyota FCEV Concept

Both Honda and Toyota will debut production FCEVs in 2015, with each automaker expecting sales to come in at approximately 1,000 units annually, but if the price being reported by Nikkei is accurate, then we wonder if either automaker will be able to sell more than a few hundred units globally.

According to Japanese news outlet Nikkei:

“Initial prices will be set below 10 million yen ($97,750 USD) and ownership is expected to spread among individuals.”

Honda’s FCEV will launch in November 2015.  The automaker says production will be 5,000 units over the next 5 years and that it intends to sell the FCEV in Japan, the US and Europe.  The “below 10 million yen” is pricing for Japan, obviously.

Meanwhile, Toyota’s FCEV will launch Japan, the US and Europe in 2015.  Annual production output will be roughly the same as Honda.  Pricing, again in Japan, is expected to be around 10 million yen.  Toyota says it can cut that price down to 3 to 5 million yen by 2020

Both firms will likely avoid major capital spending while production volumes are low. Toyota hopes to cut prices to between 3 million yen and 5 million yen ($29,325 to $48,875 USD) by sometime in the 2020s.

If this “10 million yen” figure proves accurate, then who’s going to buy a Honda or Toyota FCEV?  With practically no infrastructure in place and a Tesla Model S costing roughly the same (but with the added benefit of a robust, nationwide infrastructure) is there even a market for these FCEVs?  Perhaps there are in tiny pockets of California, but beyond that?  We don’t think so.

Source: Nikkei

Categories: Honda, Toyota


Leave a Reply

90 Comments on "2015 Toyota and Honda Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles Expected to Be Priced at $97,750 – Yikes!!!"

newest oldest most voted

And where are all the hydrogen refueling stations? Exactly.

Hydrogen? talk about a bad vehicle fire. I dont think you can even see hydrogen burning in the daytime. Seems more dangerous than gas and I think we’ve already had over 10,000 gas car fires this year.

BTW, how many electric car fires have we had this year?

Lots of fires, if you count all those regular gas vehicles that all have a 12 Volt battery.

Otherwise? Nil 🙂

Where will the hydrogen come from?
How will it be transported?
Who will pay for the hydrogen infrastructure?
How long will the fuel cells last?
Will these FCEV have longer range or less range than the Tesla Model S?
Will they be as high performance as the Model S?
Will these cars be as safe as the Tesla Model S?

will they have as much cargo and passenger room as a model S/X???

How much will it cost per mile to drive a FCEV?

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater

* Where will the hydrogen come from?
Onsite reformulation of natural gas or other HC fuels

* How will it be transported?
Existing infrastructure to reformulators at existing stations

* Who will pay for the hydrogen infrastructure?
No clue

* How long will the fuel cells last?
No clue, though AFAIK they’re pretty reliable, at least if built to NASA/Mil spec. Drivetrains would be otherwise just as reliable as other EVs.

* Will these FCEV have longer range or less range than the Tesla Model S?
300mi minimum in order to max out CARB credits.

* Will they be as high performance as the Model S?
In theory they could be better-performing since fuel cells + H2 (or HC fuels) would be lighter than comparable batteries, and always will be. However, Toyota will probably puss out and do mediocre-performing vehicles with 0-60 in the 8s or 9s and 100-150kW motors.

* Will these cars be as safe as the Tesla Model S?
Hard to say, different risks.

The fuel cells on the Space Shuttle were not terribly reliable, as I recall… Atlantis had a “cloud” form over one of the three in the ship, and it delayed launch. How durable and tolerant are current fuel cell designs to handle mainstream user demands (i.e, idiot factor) & contamination issues during transport, storage and refueling? Any impurities in the fuel or flaws in the cell, and theses hydrogen generators stopped reacting.

Also of note: how unaerodynamic looking the concept FCEVs posted here, look. Someone wants you to waste a lot of fuel…

Currenty the production of hydrogen from natural gas is just as dirty as producing gasoline

Here is a bit from the Ford 2013 Sustainability Study on the subject of producing hydrogen:

“Currently, the most state-of-the-art procedure is a distributed natural gas steam-reforming process. However, when FCVs are run on hydrogen reformed from natural gas using this process, they do not provide significant environmental benefits on a well-to-wheels basis (due to GHG emissions from the natural gas reformation process).”

Beside the fact that hydrogen costs about $3 more per gallon equivalent than unleaded gasoline. Which means to travel close to 300 miles at about 35mpg, it will cost over $80 to fuel the tank.

Electric is cleaner, costs less and unlimited in it’s raw form forever.

I don’t think that is true about the H2 price. Considering the efficiency of fuel cells, I believe that the FCV will be cheaper than gasoline to fuel. However, it won’t be as cheap as charging an electric vehicle.

Neil, the answer to your questions are:
1. Most H2 is made from natural gas and used in making gasoline. H2 also comes from water, biogas and biomass.
2. It is transported by pipeline, tanker truck and train. Some hydrogen stations make fuel on site, too.
3. Government and industry pay for stations now (not production or distribution), and only industry when the technology is more mature.
4. The lifetime of the vehicle–about 150,000 miles
5. FCEVs range is comperable to a gas car. The one I drive goes almost 400 miles on a full tank.
6. Yes. FCEVs are electric cars.
7. Yes, maybe more so because they have a lighter-than-air fuel and the fuel cell doesn’t store electricity.

1. True, though I’m having a hard time finding any efficiency numbers on steam reformation. I’d guess thermal efficiency to be in the neighborhood of 30 – 40%. And I’m being generous. 2. Yes, but can they use the existing infrastructure built for oil or natural gas? I doubt it. At least, not without significant modification. 3. Given governmental austerity policies, I don’t expect much governmental funding on refueling stations (and rightly so). Industry, specifically the oil and gas industry (who has tons of cash) will pick up the tab for this one. 4. I’ll believe that when I see it. I’ve seen ARB’s test fuel cell vehicle spend quite a bit of its life on a flat bed tow truck. 5. Again, I’ll believe it when I see it. Given that I know you are located in West Sac at the CaFCP based on your weblink, I seriously doubt you go much further than the Sac Metro area due to the obvious lack of refueling stations. That magical “Hydrogen Highway” that Arnie promised never happened. So I find it unlikely you spend much time on the freeway at high speed. 6. That wasn’t his question. He asked if they… Read more »

Good luck driving an FCEV in the Midwest during the winter like this past one with all the -20 degree F days. Your emissions of H2O will freeze before it makes it through the FC system!

Meanwhile, my Nissan Leaf performed extraordinarily well, albeit reduced range!

ICE’s have reduced ranges in the cold, as well. In my car, I lose about 30% of the range in the coldest parts of the winter, and even more if I drive less than 10 miles at a time.

I don’t believe he was referring to range. And I am also curious about what happens to that water exhaust in temperatures where water vapor can freeze in seconds.

Has anyone seen these sort of tests?

Here’s your answer: http://cafcp.org/getinvolved/stayconnected/blog/less_10_degrees_-_no_worries_air_products

The vehicles on the East Coast performed perfectly in the heavy snow and cold. Started right up, fueled fine, saw minimal change in range.

Fuel cells have enough waste heat (I think they’re 50-60% efficient) to keep the exhaust warm enough to prevent freezing. They don’t need long piping like an ICE.

I think FCVs are a waste of time as well, but let’s not trash them with false issues.

“Toyota hopes to cut prices to between 3 million yen and 5 million yen ($29,325 to $48,875 USD) by sometime in the 2020s”

Affordable fuel cell vehicles .. always 10 years away, and “making a better tomorrow.. tomorrow”.

I forgot to note, it was originally by 2020. Now they are saying in the 2020’s. LOL

*2010, 2020

Fifteen years ago, if you had said that GM, Nissan, and Tesla would be leading the charge for energy efficient vehicles, and that Honda and Toyota would be the ones dragging their heels and spreading FUD, nobody would have believed you.


Well, all the major car companies have fuel cell projects and all the major car companies have plug-in projects.

But some seem to have allocated their resources better than others. Of course, we won’t know who wins until we see how the long run shakes out. But at least GM and Nissan seem to be well on their way to creating profitable alternative fuel vehicles whereas Toyota and Honda are just getting started.

I see it less as failing to properly allocate resources, and more as a difference of deliberate aims.

+1 to the OP.

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater

Because of course.

At nearly $100,000 per, they’re probably STILL taking a loss, in order to get the CARB credits.

Batteries go wide at less than $200/kWh, solid oxide fuel cells (that can take hydrocarbons directly) go wide at $50-$100/kW.

And H2? I’m just not convinced that it’ll ever go wide unless it piggybacks off of natural gas or gas/diesel and is reformulated on-site, and if you can’t get the equivalent of 16-20kWh worth of H2 out of a gallon of gas (or NG equivalent) it goes nowhere.

It should be noted that SOFC that can take natural gas will completely transform the world’s electricity infrastructure (at least where fracking happens, like North America) at $1000/kW before finding any demand in vehicles.

$1000/kW SOFC will easily give a neighborhood 6c/kWh electricity while being completely disconnected from the grid.

Even $500/kW H2 FC will enable standalone solar power with electrolysis storage for maybe 10c/kWh, despite the inefficiency of electrolysis. Ironic that Musk’s stake in Solar City will earn him billions before auto companies make a dime off the fuel cell 🙂

SOFCs are promising but look to be pretty far out for automotive use. I agree that stationary sites are the first likely application – probably as backup “generators”. Their ramp up time is an issue for vehicles. At $100/KW for an NG powered SOFC, I would happily install 50KW of them at my home and drop off the electrical grid, assuming reliability and all that.

If natural gas is reformed on-site, what do you do with the CO2 byproduct?

You shove it up a tube, and out it goes. Hard to argue with such a simple system.

Until you start having to pay for that privilege.

Hyundai has already priced its Hydrogen fuel cell car: $3,000 up front and $500 per month for a 3 year lease. The price includes UNLIMITED fuel, currently available in Los Angeles, making road trips impossible for now. In any case, the price suggests a purchase price equivalent of under $40,000.

At a 50% residual (that’s generous), that comes out to $42,000.

That is not a real-world price. That is a heavily subsidized lease being done to beta test the vehicles and get CARB credits. There will be very limited quantities at that price.

Will they be able to sell enough to satisfy the ZEV requirement?

Oh wait, I forgot they get something ridiculous like 7-9 ZEV credits per FCEV, due to “fast-fueling” and long range.

At least for 2015-2017, if I’m not mistaken.

Type V – 300+ miles range “hydrogen” – Credit per vehicle: 9 (2015-2017 only)
Type V – 300+ miles range “fast refueling” – Credit per vehicle: 7
Type IV – 200+ miles range “fast refueling” – Credit per vehicle: 5
Type III – 100+ miles range “fast refueling” – Credit per vehicle: 4
Type III – 200+ miles range ————– Credit per vehicle: 4
Type II – 100+ miles range ————— Credit per vehicle: 3
Type I.5 – 75-100 miles range ———– Credit per vehicle: 2.5
Type I – 50-75 miles range ————— Credit per vehicle: 2

I can’t believe Toyota will be dropping the Rav4 EV for a FCEV version. I can plug in at Home and at Work. I would not be able to do that with a fuel cell. Not to mention 2x the price. What a waste of resources.

At $97K, these FCEVS are just not viable. Even if we assume they are able to quickly cut 1/3 that price you are at $70K . . . now that is at Tesla Model S level and could attract a few buyers.

But the real comparison is against a Chevy Volt. At $35K, a GM Volt can handle most work commutes on all electric power and also has long range and quick refueling for long trips. What advantage does a FCV have over a PHEV? Just the green cred of not burning any gas. I don’t think that will be enough. Especially with the fact that there are very few hydrogen stations.

That is absolutly correct, if you drive on fossil fuel hydrogen, you are better off driving in a volt that use fossil fuel sometimes and electricity most of the time instead of fossil hydrogen all the time.

Whoah! Move over Cadillac ELR!

Can someone explain to me why Toyota and Honda are so focused on fuel cells? It seems fairly clear that they don’t make any sense. So is this purely a CARB issue to sell more high mileage cars? Why not do the same with “compliance” BEVs which probably take less money to research/design/produce? I just can’t fathom what’s driving this.

Honda has long been a fuel cell advocate. Toyota has picked up the torch recently. Apparently they think FCVs are the future.

Some will point out that there are special CARB points for FCVs so they can get a lot of points with just a few FCVs. That may end up being a bad cynical choice if they follow the path of a technology that does catch on and become popular.

I also wonder if Japan’s electricity situation affects their decisions. Since the Fukushima disaster, Japan has shut down all their nukes. Japan has an electricity shortage. So perhaps that has affected their thinking on EVs versus FCVs? If so, that doesn’t seem very logical because they don’t have a supply of hydrogen either.

It isn’t just compliance FCEV is a marketing platform from which to spread FUD regarding how short-lived battery electric could be. Honda stuck its neck out delivering a 2.0ltr Atkinson, in series with a small ~1kwh battery. -very different tech, giving real 50mpgs. Toyota is simply milking HSD.

Don’t forget consumers minds are in mpg, and could be told 50mpg is better than what a 10 cent kwh could do for them. They don’t get it, and FCEV simply keeps the snow falling.

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater

Fast-fill 300+mi vehicles get 9 CARB credits. Which is why Tesla had to demonstrate their battery swap, and may roll it out in California.

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/factsheets/zev_tutorial.pdf (page 46)

The Type V credit was increased to 9 between 2015-2017: http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2013/zev2013/zev2013notice.pdf

Presumably Tesla will phase out the 60kWh variant for model X, and have something like 85kWh/110kWh/P110kWh . They’d get 4 more credits per vehicle, and hopefully their battery costs will have come down further since Model S’ initial release.

Yeah, the battery swap between LA & SF is supposed to be coming pretty soon. I don’t like those CARB rules that give so many credits to FCV due to fast-fill . . . how does fast-fill clean the air? But at least the FCV people can’t say they didn’t get any support. They should qualify for the battery tax-credit too.

I see, thanks for that info. I guess that makes a little more sense. I am still skeptical that even with the extra credits it makes better financial sense to pursue compliance fuel cell cars vs. BEVs, but I’m sure Toyota and Honda have had plenty of their best number-crunchers on the case.

there are actually a lot of hydrogen refueling stations in the LA area:

And the Hyundai doesn’t look like a bad deal with free fuel:

The Honda and Toyota will probably lease for about the same but the Hyundai will be more practical.

BTW, we do know this compliance fuel cell vehicle launch from Toyota and Honda is ONLY so they can continue to sell cars in CA. New 2015 rules dictated that manufacturers must actually ‘sell’ more zero emissions vehicle, and since Toyota is not going EV, their only option is a compliance Fuel cell vehicle like Honda.

Is that why they are releasing them in Japan and probably Europe too?

Welcome the FCV. Let the best competitor win. BTW the way, FCVs will also advance the technology for electric drivetrains.

A lot of these “advanced technologies” remind me of the time I was walking along and I passed a man walking a small, but very angry yapping dog in the opposite direction. The dog was straining at the leash to get at me.

Much to my surprise, the owner simply dropped the leash. The dog, realizing that we was free to attack, promptly ran behind his owner and hung his head.

Let the dogs of FCV go!

Indeed. I welcome these new alternative fuel vehicles to the market! I hope they are able to surprise me with quick price drops.

It still matters where the hydrogen comes from (stripping it out of fossil fuels bad), and what waste products are created as a byproduct…

How does:
‘Below $97,750’ become:
‘Will be set at $97,750’ in the headline?

I know you don’t like hydrogen, but do try for a more accurate and less sensational headline.

They have simply given a top of the range figure, not said that the cars WILL be sold at that price.

Since the Hyundai ix35 FCEV already leases for $499/mo including all fuel, it is unlikely that Toyota and Honda will turn out a car at a price which will not sell at all, whatever you may wish to think.

Asking Eric Loveday to not write a sensationalist article on a topic he doesn’t care for is like asking a wall not to resist you when you walk into it. It’s best to walk around.

Hi Brian…

Completed most of the AC end of the solar panel job. Still up in the air but I’m looking at around 7000-8400 watts. Tied into my existing panel with a supply side tap (only thing cheap that the inspector would allow). 2 inverters, probably with 20 panels on the garage and 14 on the main roof.

Hey Bill!

Sounds like a decent setup. I had to upgrade my service before I could connect the panels (despite what the contractor insisted right up until it failed inspection). The silver lining is I got to apply the generous 30% federal / 25% state incentives to the service upgrade as well.

I’ll probably be heading out to Buffalo this summer (unfortunately in the gas guzzler, not the Leaf – I really wish NYS would install CHAdeMOs on the thruway already). If it’s up and running I’d love to see what you’ve got.

Whatever happened to the $50K Toyota once suggested? That number really made some regular (but maybe a little naive)posters drink the Kool Aid on hydrogen. Welcome to reality….

Care to place a bet on the price?
I reckon it will be nearer $50k than $100k for the Toyota FCEV.

How much do you think?

BTW, working out the likely price is not rocket science.
Toyota know perfectly well that it won’t sell at $100k, not when the Hyundai already goes for $499/mo.

Nearer to $50k than $100k? So you’re betting that in 2015, the Honda/Toyota FCVs will cost less than $75k? Sure, I’ll put a dollar on that bet…

Is that $75K with or without including VIN etching, paint sealant, pin striping, market adjustments, tire and glass hazard, extended warranty, and whatever else the Stealerships can tack on to jack the price up?

Recently, I’ve been reviewing a lot of the documents I’ve collected related to transportation, climate change, energy, etc., and one detail I think a lot of people don’t understand is how much electricity it takes to make hydrogen via electrolysis. It’s a lot, over 50kWh per kg of hydrogen, which is typically good for something like 60 miles in a Honda Clarity. I’ll leave it as an exercise for the reader to calculate how many miles your favorite EV/PHEV will drive on 50kWh.

I keep telling myself that Toyota, Honda, et al. have done enough groundwork that they can leap into the EV market when batteries fall enough in price. Honda already has a winner in the Fit EV, and I would have leased one of those instead of my Leaf had any local dealer been able to get one for me. As for Toyota, aside from a PiP with a much larger pack, I don’t know what they’re up to. What ever happened to the IQ EV, anyway…?

And I will leave it as an exercise for you to calculate how much energy it takes to produce and transmit the electricity for an electric car, including of course the losses wall to wheel.

HINT: The US grid including transmission losses of around 7% provides energy at about a 33% efficiency.

That’s all well and good, Dave, but if Hydrogen is produced by hydrolysis on site (i.e. at the fueling station), then the face the same losses as an EV charger would up to that point.

The more frustrating thing is that -for the most part- hydrogen won’t come from renewable sources in the near future. It will come primarily from natural gas which has been fracked from the earth. I ask you this – for a unit of natural gas, which will travel farther: a FCV or a CNG vehicle? How does the electricity compare for stripping hydrogen versus compressing the natural gas?

The comparisons carried out for BEVs against FCEVs are usually entirely lopsided, adding up all the loses for FCEV and none of them for BEVs, instead assuming that BEVs are powered by solar, which actually presently provides way less than 1% of US power, and in any case is really used for approximately zero percent of electric car drivers, night workers with their own solar power arrays excepted. Conversely the worst of all possible cases for FCEV is assumed, and even combined, so that the inefficiency of electrolysis is assumed, whilst AT THE SAME time hydrogen in criticised as being fossil fuel burn under another name. Natural gas vehicles are around 1.7 times or so less efficient than fuel cell vehicles, even after allowing for reforming the natural gas and the extra compression needed. California has mandated that 33% of all hydrogen for transport is to come from renewables, and currently biogas is used to meet that. Biogas from sewage and landfill alone can power up to around 10% of Californian light transport. Both BEVs and FCEVs use around 1MJ/mile at the current efficiency of the US grid, although that is a bit generous to BEVs. Some of the anti… Read more »

What I prefer about battery-electric vehicles is that we’re not limited as to the source of the electrons (nuclear, solar, coal), so we can adapt as needed economically, environmentally, etc.

Additionally, the electric grid is only going to get cleaner for similar economic/environmental reasons.

Lastly, battery technology is only going to continue to improve. In a decade, today’s battery densities will be old hat. I don’t see a similar improvement path for Hydrogen.

In aggregate, hydrogen only seems to hold “promise” that doesn’t actually have a technology path forward. It seems like another technology that would have us “stuck” in a similar manner to gasoline.

We could extend some arguments that hydrogen can be formed using electricity, but at that point, why not just use batteries? They’re here today at a much lower price point, and are only improving in energy density per dollar and kWh. In just 2 model years the Volt had seen a 9% battery size increase, and a $6,000 price decrease. I don’t see a similar path for hydrogen.

There are loads and loads of paths and potential paths for the production of hydrogen, which all avoid the great defect of electricity production, storing it. If like me you are keen on nuclear then fine, fuel cells and hydrogen may be useful but are not essential. If you want a grid heavy on renewables though, the electricity has to be stored, which is why every major plan that I am aware of makes use of hydrogen, including Germany’s Energiewende. I’m not sure why you think that progress in fuel cells has been slower than in batteries, as moving on from the energy density in the Panasonic’s powering the Tesla S is proving to be non-trivial, and Toyota for instance say that the reason for their turning the iQ project into simply compliance vehicle numbers is because they cost/performance from batteries is not there. In contrast they say that they have been pleasantly surprised by the speed of progress in fuel cells, and have over a few years taken out 95% of the cost, with more to come. Now maybe for cars at least batteries will fall in cost so far and so fast, and improve so much in energy… Read more »

What is the use of hydrogen storage when pump storage has already a higher capacity and a better yield?

Pumped storage is only cheap when you have natural geography taking care of most of the construction cost, i.e. high altitude lakes near a steep elevation change, like New Zealand has.

There simply isn’t enough fortuitous geography for the world’s storage needs if we are to go renewable.

If you have to build or blast the reservoir, then cost goes up dramatically.

I really don’t agree with that. At first pump storage can work perfectly on a 200 m altitude difference which is available in almost every country. At second building a reservoir isn’t really that difficult since there is almost always a facilitating geologic feature that you can find to facilitate the building. In most case it resumes to building a pipe between reservoirs and improving upon an already present dip or natural lake.

DaveMart, fuel cells need far more than incremental improvements for automotive application.

Even at $500/kW, you’re looking at $15k for just the fuel cell, on top of which you need high pressure tanks, electric motor, and battery/supercaps. It needs to come down to $150/kW at least, i.e. a 10x reduction at least, to be viable for cars.

The reason is simple: a 30kW fuel cell in a car will have less than 2% duty cycle (13k miles/yr / 3.5kWh/mile / 30kW = 123 hours). Cars need high power per dollar.

Power plants, OTOH, can run 24/7, so 30kW will generate $15-30k worth of electricity per year. Even if they only hit 50% capacity factor as renewable backup, $500-1000/kW is as cheap as they need to get, as long as they’re reliable.

That’s the difference between the auto and power generation industries for hydrogen.

Solar may be only 1% of production but due to gov’t forcing that won’t last for long. At my house, I probably will be making more electricity per year than I myself use. Solar Cells have gone way down in price what with Chinese ‘dumping’, or at least that’s what they’re calling the price decrease.

Nuclear can’t hold a candle to solar cell pricing. I’m installing a large system on my house strictly because its a good business decision. I suspect many other homeowners will make the same assesment, and the end result in this country at least is there will be less need for any new central stations.

Solar cells with electric cars are very , very grid friendly. AT my house, I’ll make electricity during the day to run a few neighbor’s air conditioners, therefore there won’t be the strain of my neighbor’s air conditioners during the day on aug 1st.

Meanwhile, I’ll use my electricity to charge both cars after midnight when the utility has too much and they’re glad to get rid of it.

Big fan of solar power here, (always was, just never took the plunge to actually buy any until now), as if you couldn’t guess.

I have supported solar for the last 40 years. It is not however the problem free solution to everything that many imagine, and especially not anywhere outside the tropics with relatively low solar variance around the year. To look at just one issue, what do you imagine would be the costs of providing the power needed when solar is low, especially in the winter? If, as you argue, normal consumption for folk with solar arrays is much reduced, then the costs of not only the grid but the generators to provide the power occasionally has to be amortised over many fewer kilowatt hours. Something like half the costs of gas fired electricity is in distribution and transmission. That cost, and the extra generation costs of firing up the generators would put the cost of the kilowatt hours which are still needed way, way up. That does not show up on bills at the moment as the utilities are mandated to supply the power uneconomically to solar array users. The costs of that expensive electricity plus the amortisation costs of the solar array and, if people want to use the power 24/7 without the grid, back up batteries is non-trivial. That… Read more »

This is f-ing pointless.

Honda and Toyota – WHEN are you going to get some decent plugins on the road? You know you’re going to have to eventually so why keep pretending it’s not going to happen?

I have the accord plug in. Overall have to say I am pleased. I’ve had two commute patterns in the past year. A 20 mile each way got me about 110 mpg. More recently, I’m getting 135MPG with shorter trips. I get fuel every two months. While a 16 mile EV range isn’t ideal, I’ve made it work. My wife has a leaf which I can use for some trips.

It is somewhat surprising that Toyota does not offer fuel cell alternative for their most luxurious Lexus. This way they could sell tens of thousands of them without relaying heavily on subsidies.

Rich folks are keen to pay $200 000+ for a car if they get something superior and evironmentaly friendly for a compensation.

I think exactly the same as Elon about hydrogen fuel cells in cars. On the other end, there could be a possible use in airplanes and further on as an energy system on board Venus floating cities. At 54 Km altitude you have 1 bar and 20°C and the air is actually a lifting gas but the hydrogen can be used for extra lift as well as energy storage. It can permit station keeping or at contrary fast move.

DOA – what a colossal fail!

@Anon asks

And where are all the hydrogen refueling stations? Exactly.
Would you be surprised to know that California already has more hydrogen stations than it does Supercharging locations?

Surprising considering publicaly available hydrogen cars aren’t even available for a year. In addition, 19 more hydrogen stations are currently under development in California.

To provide an even more stark comparison, Tesla has exactly zero stations that provide a ‘quick fill’ per CARB standards like the hydrogen stations already do today.

California is leading the way with the Hydrogen Highway.

Tesla is leading the way with unfilled promises for CARB qualified ‘quick fill’ facilities. (even though Tesla has been collecting the credits and the $$$ that goes with them)

And where are all the Tesla battery swap stations? Exactly.

It’s funny… Not everyone lives in LA. Imagine that!!! It’s true! So the rest of your imaginary “Hydrogen Highway” does not exist for the rest of the country. Boy, that’s some highway!!! 😀 Look at how many Hydrogen Stations exist per state: http://www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/stations_counts.html Even with 23 experimental hydrogen stations in California, try driving in your unicorn painted FCV across the country to visit relatives that can’t wait till you die of cancer. Oh wait, you can’t!!! Those fueling stations don’t exist! But hey, ignore the fact that you CAN use the Tesla Supercharger Network NOW, and drive coast to coast– AT NO ADDITIONAL CHARGE!!! And Tesla continues to add more stations each week, including the EU, and soon– China. Oh, you also forgot to mention that you can just charge at home, at work, or while shopping using the almost 6000 public EV chargers in just California alone (not counting residential units!). Teslas are also one of the most flexible EVs to plug in. There is an astonishing number of adapters available. Hydrogen can’t compete with those numbers, and you can’t refuel at home, either. A common flaw in most of your lame arguments against Tesla, is the concept of… Read more »

Sorry, this should read, “…strength transforming your position into irrational rhetorical nagging.”

I hate typing on mobiles…

I want to see crash test video of a pressurized 10,000 hydrogen tank. I don’t even like the 3,600 psi CNG tanks!


The Space Shuttle replacement from Boeing (X33) was cancelled mainly due to using laminated hydrogen tanks that were not cylindrical or spherical in shape. They quickly delaminated due to hydrogen seeping into the composite materials, which flaked away weakening the tanks.

Just sad that rather than completing our ev charger network statewide… we are blowing cash on hydrogen fossil fuel company fantasies. Fuel cells have long been elusive… too hard to store enough safely, too much platinum needed, the cells degrade over time… so… lets just keep our eyes on the prize and add loads more CHAdeMO AND CCS chargers statewide and abandon the fuel cell subsidy for 500 cars maybe… versus 50k bevs.


I just felt my butt pucker.

These will not be sold in California; lease only, and just low enough to scrape up 1000 suckers a year to earn 9 CARB-ZEV credits each. Then, they don’t have to produce any battery electrics at all (that only get 3 credits each).

I’ll guess $500 month lease for the hydrogen cars. Toyota has had a heck of a time unloading the all-electric Rav4 EV, even with $16,500 capitalization reduction off the $51,000 price tag for a lease ($400-$500 monthly). Even unlimited mileage. Expect the same with their hydrogen. Like the Honda Fit EV, GM EV1, and BMW electrics before i3, those hydrogen cars will be off the crusher when the closed end lease expires.

Thankfully, for Toyota at least, they only need to sell one third as many hydrogen cars, and they won’t be EVER sent out of state since there is no way to refuel elsewhere. People were shipping the Rav4 EV out of state, and Toyota couldn’t get three credits, so they clamped down on dealers this past October 2013, and offer no financial incentive if you’re out-of-state.

The law will change for 2018 model year so that all cars only get 3 credits max, but I can

…but I can guarantee that Toyota, Honda and Hyundai will scream that the 9 credits for hydrogen cars needs to be extended because (drum roll)….

Hydrogen is “just around the corner”, plus the state of California will have spent about $100 MILLION on hydrogen infrastructure.

Can you imagine what they could do with that much money in DC quick chargers?

Next prediction: Jan 2025, the hydrogen stations are handed to Exxon or Chevron since they are too expensive for the state to run.

My father in law test drove a GM fuel cell 3 times a week for about 2 years. Very neat technology but still very expensive and there was an incident at one of the stations when it caught fire and closed the airport http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f19/report-ny-hydrogen-station-used-gm-explodes-closes-airport-95050/
I can just imagine how the press will jump on a fire that closes down a couple blocks in California.

Everything aside, it comes down to price.
The mass market votes with their wallets.
All the technology is cute, but the ROI on something like this is generations-if ever.

And, those who can afford it and jump in, certainly will not win the “smart investor” award.