Mazda Says No To Electric, Yes To Diesel, Gas … Etc.

DEC 2 2018 BY ANTHONY KARR 298

This decision could come back to bite Mazda in the very near future.

There’s no denying that, generally speaking, electric cars are a significantly greener solution than ICE-powered vehicles. However, that statement largely depends on the ways of producing electric energy, which is varies in different regions of the world. With that said, Mazda believes internal combustion engines still make more sense in terms of CO2 emissions than EVs.

Speaking with CarAdvice at the Los Angeles Auto Show, Ichiro Hirose, Mazda’s managing executive officer of powertrain development, revealed the company remains committed to gasoline engines and ICEs will continue to be its main focus.

“Each region and market has different methods of electricity generation,” he told the publication. “So we have to look at how the electricity is generated in each region. In some regions, it might be clean, so EVs are a good fit. But in other regions, due to power and electricity generation methods, ICE engines may have more advantage in terms of emissions. When we think about the goal of CO2 reductions, I think there are still more regions that ICE is a better fit, so I think for the time being we should still focus on ICE.”

Hirose believes modern gas units still can get plenty of improvements that can make them up to 30 percent more efficient than they are now. Diesels won’t be left behind, too. The Japanese automaker believes the compression ignition engine has a future and is actively working on advanced technologies to make it even better and more efficient.

2019 Mazda3

“Actually for the diesel engines, we are also continuously working on that in order to achieve the ideal diesel engine,” Hirose commented. “Especially these days, SUVs are quite popular – that means vehicles are bigger and heavier, for those types of vehicles, in terms of reducing CO2, diesel engines still have the advantage… no plans to phase out diesel.”

Mazda is not committed only to traditional gasoline and diesel engines as it was recently announced the manufacturer is bringing back the rotary engine. It won’t power a sexy two-door coupe but will act as a range-extender.

Source: CarAdvice

Categories: Mazda

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

298 Comments on "Mazda Says No To Electric, Yes To Diesel, Gas … Etc."

newest oldest most voted

Just let Mazda go bankrupt, it won’t be missed. Is there any automaker out there more far behind about EVs than Mazda? Toyota maybe. Even Ford and FCA need to make a choice, that is invest in EVs or go out of the business, but a little bit they do and we know they’ll do.

Mazda-Subaru-Toyota-Lexus-Suzuki? Zero. They should be ashamed of how they are investing their money, but hey, justice will come!

Your list includes the best car manufacturers in the world (Toyota, Lexus). Of course, they will make the transition, and within a short period overtake the rest.

It’s hard to tell that about Toyota while they still don’t have any clear plan for EVs and waste money on fuel cells instead. And about overtake the rest, there are already far better positioned companies like Tesla, Hyundai-Kia, Volkswagen, BYD, Nio, Baic…

By now it’s all about time. If they plan to reverse course in a short amount of time (let’s say a year) they can catch up and survive. If not, producing 10 millions of cars/year isn’t a guarantee of success anymore.

How do you know they don’t have clear plans for EVs? Are you a board member? Did Toyota publicly state that? You can’t reach a conclusion based on speculation.

Sure, but it would be better for them to announce that then. They aren’t giving an engaged and modern image of them acting like this. Take Volkswagen for example. Their plans aren’t passing unobserved about upgrades in factories, prototypes being tested… let’s see, if they are really doing something I think we’d know a bit about it in a way or another.

How is it better for them to announce their plans… If lets say they have a secret plan to have a 250mile range hatchback in as a 2021 model year then it lets their real competitors know when they need to be to market. There are zero business case advantages to telegraphing your long term plans. The only reason VW does it annoyingly often is virtue signaling to attempt to appease many and various groups and entities over their diesel-gate emissions issues. The false advantage is to appeal to EV enthusiasts like those of us in this chat. Some of us own EVs some don’t. I would love for insideevs to conduct an ownership poll it would be interesting. I imagine there are more than a few like myself who own an EV but we bought it pre-owned. I was smart enough to let someone else loose almost 40k on my Model S when I bought it preowned from Tesla at almost 50% of its new price. EVs are still too damn expensive for mass adoption and Mazda, Toyota, Ford, et al know this already thats why they are biding their time to $100/kwhr which is in my opinion smart.… Read more »

There’s a good reason to announce your plans: retaining customers that are willing to buy an EV car from another brand.

So far, #1 car replaced by model 3 has been Toyota Prius. Another good reason.

Then you have stock valuation. Without clear paths in what most economists know is the new black in cars… Stock falls and investors get angry.

They said nothing because they had nothing to say.

I would be careful getting investing advice from economists. I would get my advice from watching where the MMs invest their clients capital which right now anyway bodes well for companies like Toyota. Economists look at the macro forces and factors in a particular market segment. There are many and by many I mean most that I have seen in regards to the auto industry who still remain skeptical about the EV timeline with regards to cost. Toyota moved approximately 500k Corollas last year… That’s a large number of cars. That’s a large number of cars that they make a profit on. While Tesla is doing very very well with it’s M3 rollout and grabbing market share, it should be noted that it is grabbing customers away from people like Mercedes and BMW not so much people who would be buying Corolla’s or Camry’s. This will be entirely different by 2025 which is in the automotive world a long way off. I would be very cautious about writing off someone like Toyota, Honda, or Ford. Recent history has already shown that they can work together. Take the 10-speed transmission now making its rounds through Ford and soon Toyota and GM.… Read more »

That 10 speed transmission will struggle to re-coup all the development costs. ICE is on the way out generally. The BEV pace is picking up dramatically. The “decades” long future predictions for BEV’s was wayyyyy off. BEV is here and it isn’t going away. Auto manufacturers are scrambling, simply panicked. I predict that GM will make the most mistakes. Mazda has its head buried in the sand.

I agree with your argument, I just think it is amusing to see you quote that Prius are traded in on Tesla, but Prius Prime plug-in is up about 20% over last years sales. I suspect most of these are previous Prius Hybrid owners moving up to plug-in version. I doubt Toyota is getting any conquest sales. But to support the above statements, Toyota did announce they are working on solid-state Lithium-ion batteries and are concentrating on getting the price down. If they are successful, we could see a big shift.

Exactly my point. I have seen the Prius trade numbers as well but I would be very interested to know the age range of the vehicles traded. If you look at YoY sales which I believe even this site has had a few articles on. Many of those buying the M3 seem to be coming from the German luxury brands. A few like myself came from the Japanese luxury brands. While some ( probably early adopters ) are coming from the more pedestrian vehicles like the prius. It should be noted however those Priuses ( Prii not sure the plural form) can be rather pricey depending on how they are optioned. Toyota is playing and can afford to play a long game.

Do Not Read Between The Lines

Prius+Prime sales are falling and have been falling for 2 years and that’s with pricing that with incentives effectively make the Prime _cheaper_ than a regular Prius. (YTD thru October 2018 – 65,767, 2017 – 72,126).

it’s obviously just cannibalizing sales and not attracting new customers.
Prius v has been killed.
Prius c is down 30%.
RAV4 hybrid is negative flat.
Two Lexus hybrids are well up, but Lexus sales are down slightly overall.
Toyota’s approach is going nowhere. Like other Japanese companies they’re stuck in the mindset that BEVs will be small urban vehicles and they’ve been betting on HFCV and future battery tech, while iterative improvements in liquid-electrolyte lithium ion have been bringing costs down much faster than predicted. 2020/2021 is going to see a large increase in BEV deployment and sales that is going to take away more of their previous hybrid customer base.

Do Not Read Between The Lines

Toyota reported USA November 2018 today:
Prius+Prime 5,492, compared to 6,621 in November 2017. Prime 2,312, Prius sedan _3,180_.
Rolling 12 month Prius+Prime total down to 79,080 from 87,187 last year.
The decline in Prius sales doesn’t show any sign of stopping.

Actually if you want to keep your stock price up, you will want to reassure investors that you at least have a clue what you are doing in the future. Look at Ford’s stock price for example. Investing is forward looking, which is why coal stocks are penny stocks at best, even though coal produces more electricity than renewables – for now. Trend lines don’t lie. You want to skate to where the puck WILL be, and gas and diesel ain’t it.

Fair point except that for most of these large companies their stocks are institutionally held as income stocks. The portfolio managers at these companies are charged with earning a certain quarterly or annual return for the assets they are responsible for. Toyota for example has a 3.25% yield and over the last 5 years has gone from ~$110 to as of Friday $121.48 a share which isn’t bad. It’s better than Ford’s in the same time. The investors that matter right now aren’t concerned with how forward thinking a company is. Some coal stocks are doing just fine and others aren’t. Warrior Met comes to mind up almost 50% in the last 5 years with an acceptable yield of .85%. Another prime example is Dominion Resource Group aka Dominion power they have a mix of coal, nuke, and now a small amount of solar. They have an excellent 4.53% yield and a solid rate of growth. Finally NYSE CCR whose yield is an insane 11.43% and is up around 18% over the last 5 years. So no coal stocks aren’t penny stocks just do some market research first. I have no idea where you got that piece of information but… Read more »

There comes a day when the tipping point is reached. For example Exxon stock price has gone nowhere for years. But, they do pay a dividend. The Fund Manager has to be sure Exxon will continue to pay that dividend, and year after year it looks less likely that that will be possible.

Of course, some fund managers will be asleep when the change occurs. It’s high risk to continue to hold on to oil for dividends.

As I have pointed out in other comments here. Comments people seem to dislike but I don’t care. There are other ways to develop the necessary tech and it isn’t that expensive. VW just acquired a controlling stake in a solid state firm earlier this year for 100M. What they will get in return will shortcut they development cost vs. doing everything in house. QuantumScape is probably the best investment VW has ever made and there are dozens of other firms out there just like them. CES this year was a case and point these firms are everywhere and almost ripe for acquisition. Since those talks are by their nature secretive then we would have no way of knowing in advance. You are definitely correct about there being a tipping point but the volume sales in emerging and developed markets such as the US guarantee at least for the larger companies that is many years down the road. Long enough down the road for Toyota and the others to acquire their own QuantumScape. The US tipping point will be EV’s with 200+ mile range around 20k.

Good analogy, skate where the puck isn’t. Toyota sales are falling stock price is down, with lots of governmental support, yet even they are hurting and they are probably one of the best run of the legacy auto companies.

Toyota is in deep denial of BEVs ,still pushing FOOLCELLS,their styling screams FCV/FoolCells ,their press releases Hydrogen,Action speaks louder than words and Toyotas actions speak loudly ,TOYOTA GO! Toyota, going -going-GONE! Sayonara ,Toyota.

Like MAZDA, TOYOTA Will Be In Deep doo doo Before Long….. 🙁

Mazda has announced that they’re releasing a PHEV with a rotary engine. They are not going to simply disappear into the sunset.

Not so sure about the “deep denial” bit.

We all need to remember that a fool cell vehicle IS an EV!
It just has a substandard battery and a LOT of very complex, very expensive H2 hardware that can be shed when the time comes.
With that experience, a big battery, and some battery management tech, Toyota can change course relatively quickly since they are nowhere near starting from scratch.

My take on it: Toyota will be right there, competitive as ever, with massive resources, when the EV shake out gets under way!

Right about Toyota, but the BEV shakeout is already on. Prius is riding into the sunset but Toyota will come out with a mind-altering BEV right from the get go. However, It had better be middle to upper middle luxury class…..Beware the mistake the BOLT became: undersized, uncomfortable, cheap. ugly, over-priced and untested….headed for the Edsel graveyard.

Toyota WAS. Nobody is in deep denial of BEVs today.

Toyota is a publicly traded company, they can’t hide 10-20 billion dollar investments! It is a speculation, that Toyota is doing a lot in the EV field. There are serious facts, that they are not doing enough.

Toyota is a publicly traded company. They make public statements about what they’re working on. What they’re working on is hybrids (some of the plug-in variety) and fuel cells.

They also have a partnership with Mazda (who is also a publicly traded company). Mazda provides Toyota their engine technology, while Toyota provides Mazda with their fuel cell technology.

You don’t need to be a board member to know these things.

Finally, a comment in this sub-thread from someone who has been paying attention. Well said, sir!

Totota HAS Stated their current Focus is on Pushing Fuel Cell Vehicles to the Forefront, for their coming International Exposition (EXPO), so, no, I Expect No Big Change From TpToyota pushing FCV’s to BEV’s before that is a Wrap!

After, if Tesla is by then causing them sales loss pain in Cars (with the Model 3), and in CUV’s or SUB’s (with the Model Y), it would seem that they may have to make a “Sharp Turn”, and somehow still avoid “Losing Face!” Big challenges for Toyota are coming!

Toyota in particular is famous for long term strategic planning and has plans for decades, including published plans for electric vehicles. It is just you who has no clue what are you talking about and never really cared to read these plans or financial statements, if you are able to do it at all.

Never read about those long term strategic plans and neither found them with a quick search on Google, could be I am stupid, tell me where I can find them please.

Why do you attack a user on such a low level. Why do you insult users? Is this how your life goes? If you disagree, you insult?

Yes, Toyota has long term strategic planning, but the long term strategic planning and their financial statemens (a 10th grader can easily read them) do absolutely not show that they are part of the huge change to EVs in the next 5-10 years.

Toyota s game plan is FoolCELLs ,very public .

TOYOTA is Only f00ling Themselves with These f00L Cells… Not The People … 🙁

I agree that Toyota thinks foolcells will fly, and maybe in Japan they will, situation is different there, but in the US no.
Hybrids too, GM knows that PHEVs are toast when EVs are more available.

Energy is being politicized and maybe nationalized. We’ve seen the high-handedness of the British government about Hinkley Point C and the right-wingers in Australia and the US about coal and the entire Canadian political mainstream about tar sands. So it is reasonable that Toyota is part of a cabal of lobbyists planning to trap the Japanese people with fuel cells regardless of what happens in the rest of the world. None of this is being done for the best interests of the citizens.

Like you missed in the previous comment.
You can’t Hide Billions of dollars in needed investment.
And you can’t build Giga-factories overnight.

They don’t need to build a gigafactory. Toyota already has quite a few factories capable of exponentially higher production than Tesla. Companies like Toyota, Ford, and probably others are waiting until the time is right which right now it isn’t. The difference though you must realize is that a company like Toyota could in theory license a battery technology from someone like CATL and throw it into production at one of their US or European factories rather quickly compared to someone like Tesla who lacks surplus line space. These companies are likely waiting for someone to develop a commercially viable and licenseable solid state pack before they enter the market en masse. All solid state technologies show off thus far are considerably simpler to manufacture than conventional prismatic or cylindrical cells. They are waiting for these technologies to become something they can simply acquire and produce. They may be doing some inhouse chemistry work that yes we probably would be unaware of. Chemists don’t require a very large salary and for under $5 million in “R&D” a year you could hire quite a few chemists. Toyota’s R&D expenditures are many times that dollar amount so it’s entirely possible that they… Read more »

Toyota builds twice as many Corollas every year than Tesla build cars, with just one model.
They have four factories producing 500,000 Corollas each year for sale world wide.

And let me guess a thing: neither one of those 500k Corollas are electric. That’s incredible! Tesla needs to convert all its cars to ICE or it’s going bankwupt! Toyota really knows where the future is!

This is the point you are missing. ICE may be a dying technology but it isn’t dead yet. Toyota is very successful at moving VOLUME which is the name of the game. Tesla is getting there but Toyota is buying time until batteries get cheaper. The average Corolla sells for around 20k which is affordable for the middle and lower middle class. A Chevy Bolt is around 38k which is simply not affordable for many people. There are plenty of what I call “yeah buts” that I can think of to justify a bolt but for someone on a tight budget they don’t help with the car payment every month. So until EV’s can get around 20k purchase price ( govt incentives don’t often count towards the financed amount ) then ICE will continue to dominate the affordable volume vehicle segments. This is economics more than anything else. By 2025 I suspect this will have changed as battery prices continue to drop. One last thing to have no delusions about. Electric vehicles have many fewer parts than an ICE vehicle so it some ways they are far simpler to design and build. I wouldn’t make the mistake of assuming that… Read more »

Toyota is using the same strategy that Eastman Kodak did: Wait for their competitors to develop the new tech, then try to rush and catch up.

How did that work for Kodak, again?

Similar but not exactly the same. Remember that even though the fuel cells they are developing now are probably going no where except maybe in large trucks the rest of a fuel cell vehicle IS AN EV. They are developing EVs just not the way people would like to see. When the time comes the switch over to BEV should be pretty quick for them if by then we are at atleast 700wh/L density. Kodak had other issues at the time and had very few hard assets. Toyota is the exact opposite in terms of assets and very little debt to boot. I’ve seen the Kodak analogy thrown around but it doesn’t really make sense in the scope of a company like Toyota.

They filed for bankruptcy. They are through that part in their history. I wonder how many Powerpoint jockeys know what a carousel of slides even looks like.

Toyota is a well run company who will no go the way of Kodak.

The Toyota mass market BEV? It is already here. A little upscale from a Corolla and being tinkered with extensively. However there will be no introduction until the battery situation changes significantly. It will be less than $35,000 for sure but a luxury item that will apeal to the upper middle class

Astute observation Hard for some to imagine, but you are 95% CORRECT.

The discussions here often seem like people from different religious sects arguing about the wonderfulness and correctness of their own sect and the wrongness of some other sect. Let’s just not start burning anyone at the stake.

I personally think that anything less efficient (watt hours/passenger mile) than an E-bike should be banned and even have my doubts about wheels (not found in nature) but don’t give my EV driving neighbor to much grief about his wastefulness.

True, that would mean they need a 3X to 6X BIGGER investment than Tesla, or go out of business.

Not at all since a large amount of Tesla’s capex has been in things like factories, equipment, and marketing. You are significantly overestimating the capital required for an existing automaker to produce an electric model. Given the number of battery research companies out there right now Toyota is betting like VW did that they can buy up one of these small battery development firms for pocket change like VW did when they acquired an extremely large stake in QuantumScape recently. $100m is chump change for what VW will be getting from them. Toyota is likely planning the same and for all we know is already in talks.

Over the past several years, we’ve seen several hundred breathless announcements from new high-tech battery startups about their proprietary technologies.

Of those announcements, not a single one has resulted in a commercial product suitable for use in BEVs. In fact, the one and only commercialized significant breakthru in the last 10 years has come from an established battery cell maker: LG Chem.

Toyota partnering with one single solid-state battery startup will give them odds of success much lower than playing a single number on the roulette wheel.

Worse than that, Samsung bought one, and then ditched them this year. Yay for science, bu product engineering often proves most of these designs to be a commodity failure.

Buying 15 or 20 battery production/research companies will put the odds at 1 in 2…..I would bet on Toyota and its $$$ being well spent.

Toyota and Mazda have announced EV deals. Ford and VW have as well.

No, a new, very advanced BEV model from Toyota will definitely not require a larger investment than did TESLA. A formidable design challenge is already underway at Toyota utilizing the research and development infrastructure already in place. When battery design improves and price is acceptable, Toyota will be right there in the thick of competition worldwide. They have all the necessary elements already in place.

Let’s See If Toyota Can Build Twice As Many EV’s As Tesla ….. lmao …It Will never Happen Because Toyota Is Late to the Party ..Toyota Has A Lot Of Catching Up To Do to Maas Produce EV’s And With Very Little Battery Supply To Complete these EV’s … 🙁 ….Tesla Is Thousands of Miles Ahead of them All …Toyota Can Keep Their Gassers …They’re Not For Me ! …. 🙂 ….

“Toyota already has quite a few factories capable of exponentially higher production than Tesla.”

Or to put it another way: Toyota has so much invested in factories building gasmobiles that it’s going to be enormously difficult for them to change course to building BEVs. Even worse, they’re fighting against that change tooth and nail.

The Hammtramk (oh goodness, how is that spelled) facility that is finishing up its Volt production was dedicated, correct? I remember it shared the Cruze manufacturing there. The GM Bolt is made mostly by LG, and the glider and final assembly is done by GM somewhere. VW speaks loftily of dedicated EV factories five years out (or is it four?), so whatever the case, I don’t think Toyota can turn on a dime and switch their Prius factories over to Mirai factories (hey, it’s an EV, just an FCEV) in one hell-bent weekend or pop a tent in a month to build a new General Assembly line.
What Mazda is probably saying here is they don’t have a five year plan to make any BEVs. They want to build the “ideal diesel engine” before they go. Fine. Bitter end, cling on to it, and all that. Just don’t expect me to invest in that business model.
It’s not like they didn’t build something:
http://www.mazda.com/en/innovation/technology/env/ev/
Somebody higher up said no. I don’t remember exactly, but I think his name was Seppuku.

Mazda has missed a lot of opportunites and taken many a stray path over the years…and yet they lucked out enough to survive until now. And now? Hmmmmm

They had better stop research on diesel, fuel cells and ICE in general……I don’t think they will take the right path much less realize that major, life saving decisions have been presented and must be made.

VOLT – BOLT – KARMA – OWEN MAGNETIC – EDSEL – YUGO – TUCKER – DELOREAN etc etc etc – – gonna stay gone! MAZDA may be next!

That is how it appears, not how it is. You really think Toyota hasn’t been mulling over all this for years? They got to be who they are through reasonable, sensible, well thought out business decisions.

Toyota should drop all PRIUS research and development TODAY! Build them and sell them as they are…begin all phasing out strategies. Sell until it is obvious, THEN bail on Prius.

Seems you live on a different planet/timeline.

Yes, Toyota Dies plan to make BEV’s, in the Future, as Commuter EV’s, since they will (as they have said) build them with lower ranges, probably not greater than the Current Leaf, at 150 Miles/250 KMs! Not All will have that much range, either, as most will be nearer the 100-125 Mile or 160-210 KM Range!

They have clearly stated they plan on long range Vehicles, to ne FCV’s, due to fast refueling times!

Yeah, like that long-term strategic plan Japan once had to take over China starting with Manchuria and then faking incidents as an excuse to expand southward, while its navy defeated the US fleet in a single great battle that would force Washington to negotiate for peace. They worked on that plan for almost 50 years.

I like Toyota , oops meant used to, having no vision of going full BEV in the near future and making fun of the leader in BEVs is Toyota s way of full denial and doing sepuku to itself.

I like how toyota hydrogen fuel cell dream is dying. Their non-plugin hybrids are also a dying breed.

Basically Japan needed Korea and maybe even China to sign on to the scam. A new East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere? Hyundai/Kia is being too flexible about its options to get locked in to fuel cells, which prevents the kind of hardball lobbying needed to force governments to foot the bill for the infrastructure. China is already well on its way to EVs because the technology is more accessible to its existing companies than fuel cells, and it can export the resulting product without worrying about the fuel cell policy decisions of every foreign government.

Fuel cell yes, unlikely to work out. Regular hybrids hardly. More likely (along with efficient engines) to become the default baseline for motor vehicles. Substantial CO2 reduction at (relatively) low cost. Plug in hybrids and EVs currently are barely salable to any but true believers (or rich high performance EV buyers) without tax credits/rebates.

Do Not Read Between The Lines

Adding additional components and assembly requirements to an ICEV will just make BEVs relatively cheaper.

Unsubsidized BEVs will eat the premium space first, then eat the near-premium space, and then eat the mainstream space.

It’s an inexorable march of technology. Unlike hybrids, it doesn’t matter that people don’t care.

Mazda is working on its compression ignition gasoline engines which promise maximum thermal efficiency of over 50% (compared to 40% for the Atkinson cycle engine in the current Prius). That level of thermal efficiency, especially if combined with a hybrid drive system would produce remarkably low CO2 per mile. While the transition to mainly electric light vehicles may go more quickly than some established manufacturers expect it will also be a lot slower than many who comment on this site imagine. The ICE has been declared to be dying many times over the last few decades and just keeps gaining power (specific output), increasing efficiency, reliability, durability and drive-ability and lowering combustion byproducts (pollution). It’s far from dead.

Do Not Read Between The Lines

People don’t care about efficiency.
They care about cost.
Electrification keeps getting cheaper.
That’s why it will win.

Mazda completely relies on Toyota for the electric developments. They have already announced they will source some hybrid technology from their Japanese big brother.

Toyota seems to be taking a very big risk. From the outside it looks like they hope their hybrid technology will get them through the lithium-ion era and they are firmly gambling on solid state technology. There seems to be no intention to produce EV’s at scale before the solid state battery is commercialy available. They are saying 2023, but that’s not the worst case scenario. What if Toyota has no significant presence in the BEV market for the coming ten years, will they still be relevant then?

The Mazda rotary engine is converted to an hydrogen burning range extender. We know from the BMW Hydrogen7 that burning hydrogen gives even lower levels of efficiency than the fuel cell. Moreover, hydrogen technology hopefuly won’t be needed for passenger transport in most of the world, so it’s a technology restricted to its home market (in Japan hydrogen might make some sense).

Mazda makes some nice looking vehicles, so I hop they have a Plan B.

Nikola will build out a network of H2 stations by Nel,that will be available to anyone’s that gives a big boost to anyone selling FCV in the US,same for EU,you need fewer stations as the range is so much longer and the refueling so much quicker.
Mercedes is selling a plug in FCV so you get the best of both worlds.FCV makes the most sense for lager vehicles, such as trucks, but the technology will spread.It is already widespread for forklifts.

You mention the Mercedes GLC F-cell. It is the perfect example why hydrogen has limited appeal. The fuel economy of that car is given as 18 kWh/100km on electricity or 1 kg/100km on hydrogen. Now for the Dutch situation with an electrity price of about 0,25 €/kWh, fuel cost is 4,5 €/100km. Hydrogen price here is 10 €/kg so fuel cost amounts to 10 €/100km. Who is going to pay more than twice the fuel cost for the convenience of quick refueling?

And there’s more. Production cost of electricity is in the range of 0,07 €/kWh, all the rest is tax (70%). For hydrogen the production cost is about 8 €/kg, rest is tax (20%), and this is hydrogen from natural gas. Hydrogen from electrolysis is still significantly more expensive. So there is no realistic scenario for the short term to make hydrogen more cost competitive. Hydrogen from electrolysis will always be more expensive than electricity straight to a battery, because of the inefficiencies in the hydrogen supply chain.

Hydrogen will have its use in the future energy system, but we must all hope that no one is going to waste a lot of money trying to push fuel cell vehicles.

“Nikola will build out a network of H2 stations by Nel…”

No, they won’t. Their business plan is even more unrealistic and unworkable than (Project) Better Place’s was. Nikola’s failure is painfully predictable, and as inevitable as night following day.

You must be joking. This is the list of manufacturers of low powered and certainly the ugliest cars ever made.

You forgot the /sarcasm tag.
Of course, they won’t make it because it takes years, and Billions of dollars of Investment.
All companies eventually fail.
Japanese companies are not immune to oil bribery.
Who controls the Japanese Government and Industry.

Like a friend and Coworker used to say: “NATO: No Action, Talk Only!” Making Vehicles, sure, Toyota has that skill in Spades! As to high volume! Batteries sufficient for even 100 mile range EV’s? Not so well prepared! Let alone highly preferred 200 Mile range EV’s, or your more desired 300+ Mile Range EV’s, at any high volume! Think on this, the Bolt EV by GM plus LG, still is not getting enough cells to make Battery Packs for cars at Tesla Model S Volumes of about 50,000 per year, let alone Tesla Model 3 Volumes, of even just 4,200 per week, let alone the latest focus of reaching 7,000 per week across the line, soon! That is at a rate of about 200,000 per year now, at the low end, and 350,000 per year, at the 7K per Week Rate! Panasonic is gearing up to move GF1 Cell Ouput rate from the 20 GWh per annum rate, to the 35 GWh Per Annum rate already! And… That 35 GWh is expected to be 1/3rd of the Final 105+ GWh GF1 Production Rate, once finished! Do you honestly think making a Million EV’s can be done by simply “Flipping a… Read more »

Kodak and Nokia were some of the best manufacturers in the world but they failed. Keep in mind the cost to pivot to EV’s will drag down quarterly numbers. Investors might bail if they see heavy “cash burn” that Tesla got slammed for. Don’t forget pushback from unions like GM is dealing with, and negative press up to the president that could damage your brand if not handled right. Pension fund and other legacy debt would make it hard to switch overnight. Stealerships tend to have a negative view of EV’s due to the lack of repair revenue, and the extra time needed to sell an EV (you don’t have to explain how to gas up an ICE car, or where to get gas, etc. You have to take a lot of time to educate a potential buyer so they’d rather put you in a gas car. I know from experience) The transition for GM and Ford will be messy. The longer you wait, the messier and harder, which ironically is influencing their decision to hold off.

We live in an amazing time where business lessons are being unlearned right before our eyes.

Something I don’t understand how that simple statement of facts can get so many down votes. It’s simple business. You wait until SS batteries are viable then you leverage economies of scale to blow away smaller competitors like Tesla and others that are still trying to stabilize by beating them on price. This is exactly what Toyota is doing while they may not publicly say so I know for a fact it is what Ford is doing.
Statements like this don’t make enthusiasts happy but it is the way business works. Nothing to get upset about. Especially because like it or not at present EV prices aren’t yet low enough for mass adoption. Based on that simple truth the mainstream automakers know they still have 5 years or so to cook up plans quietly. They also have the capacity to execute those plans far more quickly in terms of volume and distribution channels than a newer startup does. This is nothing to get upset over its just the natural course of things. I am sure that there are companies that will not survive. Chrysler I am looking at you but I have a feeling most will be just fine.

Bahahahahaaaaaa

“Until SS batteries are viable” is a long, long time from now, and Toyota knows it.

There’s zero certainty that solid state will ever beat conventional batteries in overall value for mainstream cars. You could have billions in revenue today with a great $2000/kWh SS battery, tens of millions at $10,000/kWh. It’s still not available without huge drawbacks.

By 2025, conventional will cost less than $80/kWh. If what you say is true, Toyota and Ford will enter the market way too late.

But most of us know Toyota is just using SS as a cover for not believing in EVs.

Most of the analysis I have seen put mass market solid state price well under 100/kWh because of materials and manufacturing process. Dr. Goodenough’s own paper substantiates this. From what little we know of the SS batteries being developed at present they are inline with his predictions. From what I am seeing SS batteries are probably 5-7 years from US roads so that really isn’t that far off. To support this there are Chinese maker Qing Tao Energy Development Co are saying they already have a viable product ( I highly doubt this ) and are putting it into limited production. That news story is over on Electrik. Take it with a grain of salt since it is a Chinese firm but it does seem to suggest that we aren’t that far away.

Those analyses are about as accurate as the DOE’s 2013 estimate of fuel cells costing $55/kW.

Goodenough’s results haven’t been reproduced anywhere else, has several red flags, and isn’t good enough yet for a viable product (very slow charge/discharge, and far worse at low temperature).

Current emerging SS or semi-SS batteries have limitations, like low cycle life, and it’s likely Qing Tao is the same. That’s still good enough for many applications, but not EVs.

5-7 years may be an optimistic guess for when SS appears in expensive EVs, but mainstream EVs won’t find them economical for much longer, IMO. Conventional batteries are advancing, and solids have inherent disadvantages to liquids when it comes to chemical reactions and diffusion.

It takes money to compete at GigaFactory size investments. Ford and GM do not have that money, and when they go to shareholders telling them they need to spend Billions and profits will be thin for years to come, they have a Problem.

Toyota is in exactly the same situation.

Not really VW proved that one. $100m USD bought them a controlling interest in QuantumScape. VW will have to invest more for the joint venture production but it’s chump change comparatively speaking. This being said I expect Tesla to survive and thrive. As mentioned in other comments the legacy automakers except GM are waiting out lithium ion prismatic and cylindrical cells in favor of solid state technology. VW has confirmed as much with their bargain acquisition this summer. Toyota has stated the same publically as has Honda. GM on this other hand has a joint venture with LG. The Bolt’s sales will continue despite the Volt being axed freeing up battery production capacity for packs for the Bolt. The bolt sells well for what it is, however it does sell better than the Leaf which is its closest actual competitor. Tesla is however outselling the bolt with the model 3 many many times over but it is capturing sales from the Germans and some Prius owners. Look for the other mainstream automakers to announce joint ventures or acquisitions in the coming years similar to what VW recently did with Quantum. Remember that solid state offers cheaper and more importantly simpler… Read more »

@ Diesel

Until when (what year) do you think that Toyota can still keep waiting and still not start selling any new EV model, and still be able to stay alive?

Is that 2025, or 2030, or even later than that?

If I were to bet I would say they will have a full BEV by 2022-2023. BEVs need to get to 200mi+ range at around $20k to be viable enough to displace a vehicle like the Corolla. Toyota is playing a long game with this. They have announced solid state battery development with market target in that range. There are large parts of the market that simply cannot afford EVs at their present prices and Toyota tends to do very well in those places ( think Latin America and Africa ). I would further guess that by 2025 Toyota will be in wind-down mode for its current ICE offerings finally phasing them out by 2035 entirely. That date is simply because I doubt that the electrical grids in places like Latin America and Africa will add the capacity necessary to support a transition in those markets any sooner. There are after all a large number of people who will and do buy their products in those markets. The math shouldn’t surprise anyone. It goes like this Toyota sells 500,000 Corollas per year globally. To achieve an acceptable range they will need aproximately 60kwh of battery capacity or more. Multiply the… Read more »

This is disruption. Business that relies on older technology, which is falling into disfavor, loses market share.
That’s the reality of what we are facing, and size is only relative if your competition is not capable of at least matching your superior product. ICE ,FCV, Diesels, can’t compete therefore they will fall out of favor, as will those who make those products.
It’s not just flipping a switch to make a viable competitive ev, as others counter commenting your voluminous posts.

It will take years of effort and work. To say Toyota is behind misses the point in that, apparently they haven’t been doing much in the ev space, as they pronounced that evs are not ready for mass production, while the truth appears that they are not ready to produce them.

Yep exactly my point. In the next 10-15 years I expect it will be very hard to find an ICE car in NA or EU markets. My point which you seem to understand is that these legacy makers have the capacity to compete and can leverage massive economies of scale when they are ready. It’s WAAAYYY too early to pronounce impending doom for any of them. VW acquiring a controlling interest in Quantum has shaved 5-10 years off of their developement of SS batteries. The point is legacy makers don’t have a rockstar like CEO that Tesla does and therfore they cannot behave the same way period. My personal guess is that over the next 2 years websites like this will get plenty of stories about an automaker acquiring a battery developement firm to print and by 2025 most of them will be turning out millions of BEVs per year. The difference between a company like Rivian ( their truck looks freaking amazing ) and a company like Ford or Toyota is the ability of the latter two to get very large investments if they need them for capacity. While I certainly hope Rivian does well they and companies like… Read more »

I just happen to disagree, and though it will take 10-15 years,
I don’t think it will be that easy to catch up.
Like The Old Same Place, or the Same Old Place, you can’t get there from here.

“…these legacy makers have the capacity to compete and can leverage massive economies of scale when they are ready.”

Repeating the same misinformation (or disinformation) over and over doesn’t make it any more true. Toyota and other large automakers are faced with “The Innovator’s Dilemma”; a dilemma which Tesla and other startup BEV makers don’t face.

There is no question that some of the current automobile market leaders won’t survive the transition of the EV revolution. Toyota may or may not be one of them, but claiming that Toyota has an advantage just because it’s big demonstrates profound ignorance of the subject.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Innovator%27s_Dilemma

You folks are continuously presenting yourselves as better informed and cleverer than Toyota.

“Something I don’t understand how that simple statement of facts can get so many down votes.”

Are you trying for some sort of troll award? Choosing the screen name “Diesel” to post to an EV forum, and posting anti-EV pravduh that you claim is a “statement of facts”?

Vladimir Putin would applaud your disruptive comments here.

It’s a screenname I have used for 20 years that has nothing to do with diesel fuel. If you’ve read my other comments in other threads which seem to be less problematic for people then defending the business cases of large companies here. you would know that I own a 2016 model s and my fiance has a Chevrolet volt. There is no trolling going on here.

Ad hominem attacks though or usually a sign of a weak argument, weak mind or both.

Let’s see how much sense your claim makes if we change a couple of names “Your list includes the best largest retailers in the world (Sears and Kmart). Of course, they will make the transition, and within a short period overtake Walmart.”

That isn’t even remotely equivalent. We’re not talking about a change in type of vehicle. As you are with commerce the death of Sears and Kmart has as much to do with Amazon and the internet as it had to do with low cost low Service alternatives such as Walmart. The difference is and the point I have been trying to make is that large established automakers have both the capital reserves and the physical assets as well as the time to make the transition. Even at current rate of adoption in North America electric vehicles will barely account for a double-digit market share of vehicles sold. This isn’t a number I’m pulling out of my ass go read any financial publication. I would start with Forbes that’s my preference. Though it is progressing a bit faster than some thought it would.

But not to me because JUSTICE WILL NOT COME!

Changing a big company? Nah, thats not easy.. brings up memories og Kodak..
Year by year more and more people get it – ev sales are soaring- production is the limiting factor for years to come
Rip Mazda, i dont understand why you will let Byd, Tesla and other newcomers take over Your place

It seems Nissan-Infiniti-Mitsubishi (and even them need to seriously catch up) are the only Japanese automaker that wants to survive.

Mazda is very invested in ICE engineering and innovation. So now the fallacy of sunk costs applies – they will be reluctant to give up the decades of investment they’ve made in engine engineering.

It’s not a fallacy if you’ve invested into the most efficient engines, whch will be the ones remaining the longest. They have a good chance of remaining in the ICE/HEV-game for a long time.

Well, surely gas with 25% efficiency or diesel with 40% is much better than an electric motor with up to 95%.

Jesus, at least learn how to troll in a good way if you really enjoy this negative activity so much 😉

It isn’t trolling if you are simply pointing out the facts. Just as you did. Accounting for DC/AC conversion and thermal loss its true that EV’s are more “efficient” than an ICE when it comes to converting stored(chemical) energy into motive power. This still holds true even when you add in losses due to grid transmission and charging losses at the EVSE. However ICE will still have a use case for atleast the next 10 years. Think rural or underdeveloped areas such as Latin America and Africa. Mazda and Toyota are global automakers that serve more than just the wealthy North American and European markets. If you think about it on a global scale it makes sense. I have a feeling like Toyota they are waiting out battery prices knowing that the volume movers are still 15-30k USD vehicles. Thus far EVs still can’t compete in that price range very well. Unless you yourself are trolling yourself you have to realize that there are markets besides NA and Europe and for the most part those markets cannot afford EVs at their current prices. Hell even those markets have cooled and I am one of the many that is due to… Read more »

If you actually believe your own B.S, which seems rather doubtful, then you are clearly incapable of recognizing the difference between an actual fact versus your own factually incorrect opinions.

If you’re not just trolling, then your comments are a great example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect in action.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Yes, there will be a large market for ICE vehicles for many years to come. Countries without advanced development plans will fall behind BEV-wise and still require ICE in transportation, agriculture and industry.

Like their underpowered rotary engines which burn more engine oil than a Lambo v12 fuel.

My own 1983 RX7 GSL-SE with Aftermarket Arkay Turbo on the old 12A Wankel Rotary Engine, driven at 90 KPH speed limit with 2 people on board, from Lake Loise, Alberta, to Kamloops, delivered 30 Mpg! In twisty, mountainous terrain, with real hills and valleys, not on some EPA Treadmill!

The most efficient engines will be the costliest engines. ICE will survive in other applications but few of todays engines will survive.

A small defeated company of small people. Will be disgrasefully disrupted. Their rotary engines were such a massive joke.

Rotrary engines are a polution machine and wear out very quickly…

We are a descendants of a defeated people,1066 the French conquered England,and we still rule this country.

Brilliant.
So then the French actually won and lost the Battle of Agincourt.

Don’t give Broncobet attention, if you follow Electrek you’ll understand why.

BroncoBet is a maroon.

“SUVs are quite popular”

I think this is why they say ICE is better for CO2. In some places (but not all places!), EV-SUV might be more CO2 emitting than gasser, especially in light of how inefficient “SUV” can be made as shown by ipace (and why I often hammer that POS)

Mazda doesn’t make them now, but if (when?) there are SUV as large as tanks like Suburban and Expedition and Mazda’s lack of EV experience could result in pretty lousy SUV EV.

What are you talking about?

The I-Pace gets 80 mpg and Toyota Prius gets 55 mpg. The Jaguar is much bigger, heavier, faster and more aggressive looking.

MPGe does not take into account CO2. Tesla S roughly on par with gasser in coal country, and having 25% worse efficiency than S means ipace is actually worse than gasser in those areas.

Mazda with their HCCI engine would probably do better than average gasser while their lack of EV experience could result in pretty awful EV.

Let’s not drink the flavor-aid. Making good EV that’s better than gasser is not easy, and Mazda is recognizing that. While I think they should do their homework, I hold no delusion that they’ll come out with EV any time soon.

Do Not Read Between The Lines

It’s a Japanese company. The Japanese view seems to be stuck on the idea that BEVs are just going to be small, urban vehicles, while the rest of the world is building out faster charging infrastructure and long-range BEVs. Maybe it’s the access-to-charging canard.

I think it really just comes from Japan having a strong interest in the status quo and hoping that BEV doesn’t work out so that their automotive sector doesn’t get destroyed.

Germany went through this with diesel, but then the VW scandal happened and they’re moving on.

Well, more people live in apartments and Condo Towes in Japan, proportionately, than in USA, it seems, so home charging would be a thing to deal with, in such a high density population arrangement!

What’s the problem? They have to park somewhere, don’t they? So install L2 EV charge points wherever they park.

I don’t understand why people think this isn’t going to happen or that it will be hard. Before the motorcar revolution, there weren’t many parking places in cities for motorcars. Now they’re everywhere. Soon curbside EV chargers (or wireless chargers buried under parking stalls) will be seen everywhere that people park overnight.

Japan has an electricity shortage which will make the transition to BEVs harder for them, but they’ll figure out a way sooner or later. Heck, if they would just re-start their nuclear power plants, that would alleviate most of the problem.

I lived in apartment when I had a Leaf. There was a chargepoint level 2 a few hundred yards from my apartment. 50 cents per hour. That’s over six kWh for 50 cents!!!!! Beat that with an ICE!!!

Maybe the gas stations would be converted to charging stations? Home charging would be impossible as there is not much in the way of parking. Condo parking and charging, with an alarm notifying your car is charged….might work. Practically, I think people would, after work, take the time to fully charge their batteries, then go home. Besides, the daily usage might be low and once a week charging is all that is needed. We shall see eh? Lots of interesting angles to an all BEV economy.

If you are producing your electric power from coal (only or mainly) you need to shoot yourself anyway.

You probably haven’t heard that coal is on the way out. Also, people won’t base their car buying decisions on where their electricity comes from anyway. It comes down to cost, performance/utility, and looks. The only thing holding back EV’s is battery costs. That is being brought down my mass production. The moment you can walk onto a dealer’s lot and buy a fully capable EV for slightly less than a gas car, it’s game over for ICE. That day is rapidly approaching. What happens when you as a company have nothing compelling to offer? Is THAT the day you announce your plans?

Just curious – do you think people base the decision to go with an electric stove and water heater or go with gas based on whether they get their electricity from coal or not?

The I-Pace is not just built for the US market. It is already being delivered (at the time of writing) in more countries than the Model 3 is at present. Most of these countries are not dependant as the US is on Coal for Electricity. As I type this, in the UK, 2.5% of the Grid Electricity is generated by coal.
Any EV in this market is far better for the environment than any ICE vehicle.

Mazda is on its last legs and given the current management at Toyota and Subaru, they won’t be far behind. Remember that many countries have already decreed the end of new pure ICE sales. Even the CEO of Shell Oil says that these dates are too far in the future and should be brought forward.

What future pure ICE cars now eh?

Where I live in British Columbia 0% of our electricity comes from coal because this is not a Dickens novel

Thank you! It gets so tiresome reading outdated EV bashing based on the “What about coal country?” argument.

In case people haven’t been paying attention, burning coal is fast disappearing, and most people don’t live in “coal country” anymore.

BC imports electricity from Alberta and the USA, so you are incorrect.

An alarming number of people think they’re living in a Dickens novel, and worse they’re cheering for the villains.

A lot of people at these forums live in a comic book.

Interesting that you say “The I-Pace is not just built for the US market. It is already being delivered (at the time of writing) in more countries than the Model 3 is at present”, but forget the Square Miles of Size of the Model 3’s current Delivered 2 Countries is greater than a dozen of some European Countries, if not Over 50 Countries size, in some situations, it seems! Just British Columbia, would be as big as some Countries in Europe, and bigger than a Half Dozen of the Smaller Countries there! That is not even counting Ontario and Quebec, or California or Texas! (By the way, Texas was considered a Country on its own, at one point!) So, political borders aside, it seems the Model 3, in just USA & Canada markets, are as complicated as putting it into Europe, which is just about to begin, as well! Let’s just see if the Jaguar I-Pace can outsell the Bolt EV’s sales numbers, In all the Markets it sells in, vs just USA Bolt EV Sales, before we can compare it to the Model 3, at least! So in two years time (About how long Bolt EV has been Sold… Read more »

If Lucas Electric has anything to do with the Jaguar I Pace, Jaguar will be peeling the egg from its stiff upper lip for some many years to come. Laughter…..don’t expect much of the Jaguar BEV.

It is wise to point out that Britain is still one of the world’s largest car markets and its people have every reason to expect cars that reflect its unique realities. We’ve forgotten that, because Britain has collapsed as an actual car-building power, its famous brands now foreign-owned fronts. Tata-Jaguar has made it possible for British energy to power British cars for the only time in history besides the dying North Sea fields.

Like Ichiro Hirose, you appear to be factually mistaken. West Virginia is the most coal dependent state in the U.S. with 95.6% of it’s electric power being produced by coal.

According to the EV Emissions Tool from the Union of Concerned Scientists, the CO2 emissions of a Tesla Model S P100D is 225g of CO2 per mile in W.V., while the average emissions from a gasoline fuel car is 381g/mile, so it is not roughly on par, it is 41% less emissions. That’s not trivial, and that is the dirtiest power in the U.S. The power grids will only continue to get cleaner, and no one will ever harvest gasoline from their own rooftop.

But this is looking at CO2 only. Dozens of cities, and even countries, are already discussing bans on diesel engines as soon as 2025, and all combustion engine cars as soon as 2030, and it isn’t just about CO2, it’s about air quality. Is Mazda recognize that they are functionally withdrawing from these markets? Who in the Paris region will buy a diesel now when they know that in six years it will be banned?

UOCS is political organization, not science. Relying on them is drinking the flavor-aid. Think about it; 90%+ coal, 25% efficiency in converting coal to electricity to home, 75% charge/drive train (overall efficiency similar to average gasser) result in 41% less emissions using far more polluting coal? Makes no sense.

Engineering Explained explained things with actual numbers, and worst case Tesla S is roughly similar to best case gasser. Mazda going forward with their better gas engine will surpass inefficient EV in coal country. And let’s not forget that they will not turn out Tesla (or SparkEV), but more likely to be crap EV like Leaf and IPace due to inexperience.

UOCS is both political and scientific, and their articles are solidly based on fact.

Unlike the majority of your posts, which are based on “alternative facts” (plus a large dose of one-percenter class warfare).

“Reality has a well-known liberal bias.” — Steven Colbert

Reality for liberals has liberal bias. That’s called confirmation bias, especially when you live in a plantation. You might want to examine some of the so-called solidly based fact as if it came from right winger instead of taking all left wing “facts” as gospel.

The reality is thermal efficiency and pollution controls are both improved by having a central source instead of a little combustion plant in every single car. And you better explain what is more right-wing than a Southern plantation, with all that neo-Confederate nostalgia that drove the GOP’s Southern Strategy.

Lol. Quoting Steven Colbert about Liberal bias is like quoting the Pope about Catholicism.

The reason an electric motor will always beat an ICE is that ICE are at best 20 percent efficient, whereas electric motors are at least 90 percent efficient. ICE can’t win. It’s like Steve Urkel trying to fight Mike Tyson in his prime.

Looking at the emissions data from the EIA, Wyoming is actually the state with the worst CO2 emissions at 2.08lbs/kWh.

https://www.eia.gov/electricity/state/

A combusted gallon of gas produces 20lbs CO2.

Using EPA average estimates, A Tesla P100D in WY will produce .728lbs CO2/mi.
The most efficient non-hybrid Toyota Camry will produce .58lbs, while the least efficient Camry will produce .76lbs.

So I’ll concede, that worst case EV is roughly par with best case gasser.

But hey, in WY, in 2016, there were 211,613 registered automobiles, while California, the top state, has 14,768,392 (A P100D in CA produces .18lbs CO2/mi).

If Mazda wants to base their business strategy on how things look in WY instead of CA, that’s their business.

Uh… You can’t compare CO2 emissions from production of electricity with the burning of gasoline without taking into account what it takes to actually drill the oil, transport it, refine it, transport it, pump it. etc. But if you do, you should also take into account what it takes to build and maintain the electric plant and grid too.

Anyway, if you only look at CO2 emissions from the exhaust pipe of a Toyota Camry, you should compare it to the emissions of Tesla P100D using the electricity from its battery.

True, but this isn’t a rigorous analysis accounting for all inputs. It’s simply looking at the published government data of plant emissions and vehicle efficiency. I didn’t account for transmission line losses either. It is a gallon of gas in the tank to kWh in the pack comparison.

“Tesla S roughly on par with gasser in coal country…”

Not if you compare the Model S with an equally large and powerful gasmobile. Only if you compare the Model S to a small economy gasmobile.

Let us compare apples to apples, please; and not apples to Rubik’s Cubes.

https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1115679_electric-cars-got-even-cleaner-in-a-year-new-grid-data-shows

There is no “coal country” anymore. There are places that still get a majority of electricity from coal, but natural gas will bankrupt the coal-burners and wind will sweep the Great Plains. By 2025 you will have to calculate CO2 everywhere assuming coal is down to 50% of the mix or less.

More importantly, few Americans live in those places, relatively speaking. Per capita incomes are low and no one is going to buy Teslas or Jaguars anyway. (Or Mazdas.) We forget how concentrated the American population and wealth is on its three coasts and the Great Lakes. I do not think Mazda intends on making a living off of Idaho, Utah, Kansas, Iowa, or Arkansas. Japanese companies live and die in California where gas jumps to 4 bucks a gallon whenever a sheikh sneezes.

The I-pace doesn’t use any gallons at all.

It’s a conversion used also for EVs.

And it’s really stupid, miles is stupid, gallons are stupid and mpg is the worst.
Even trying to understand a difference between 10mpg and 15mpg is not 50%.
How about L/100km and km/kwh.

That is sort of silly. The units of measure is not really that important. Now using L/100km does make a lot more sense than mpg – but whether one uses liters or gallons is unimportant.

No, “MPGe” is a metric used to measure energy efficiency in an EV. MPG is not, even if Chevy Volt owners have been persuaded to misuse it as if it was.

At 33.7 kWh thermal energy equivalent per Gallon of Gasoline, it is easy to figure MPGe!

How many miles does your sample vehicle (I-Pace) deliver, or “Get?” Find that number (say, 3 Miles per kWh, or 333 Wh per mile) and multiply by the aforementioned 33.7 (so 3 x 33.7) to get your equivalent MPGe! (101.1 MPGe, in this example). Plug in your own numbers for your own experience!

The iPace is 80 MPGe. One Ge has 33.7kWh of electricity, and if the electricity is 50% clean and 50% coal, for example, it would emit about 17kg of CO2 (and some grids are even dirtier). One G of gas emits 9kg of CO2.

So 80 MPGe in such a grid is worse than 50 MPG gasoline in terms of CO2.

Of course, nothing with the IPace’s performance is even close to 50 MPG, and both NA and Europe grids are below 0.5kgCO2/kWh and dropping.

But I’m just saying it’s not as simple as 80 vs 55.

What the hell is a gallon? What the funk it’s a mile?
Let’s join the civilized world shall we

I wish we could.

Does one gallon of gas emit 9kg of CO2 including or excluding provisioning of the fuel?

“So 80 MPGe in such a grid is worse than 50 MPG gasoline in terms of CO2.”

But there aren’t any mass-produced pure gasmobiles which get 50 MPG. The closest you can come is a high-efficiency HEV like the Prius. If you’re comparing one type of EV to another, then say so, and don’t pretend you’re comparing a BEV to a gasmobile.

SUVs use more gas than cars, so the beneficial impact of EV SUVs grows, not shrinks.

That’s true if every EV SUV prevents the sale of one ICE SUV. That’s probably true, but we don’t have a way to prove it directly.

This Mazdadude has clearly no worries about how the skyhigh amount of electricity is generated, that is needed to power an oil reffinery. Mazda makes nicely looking cars, and once, a few years back. I was close buying a Mazda3. Now I will not ever consider buying a Mazda. Hope they still exist in 10 years from now.

The Nobody-san clearly has no clue what he is talking about. I am so happy I convinced some of my friends to ditch their Hondas, Mazdas, and Lexus and change to Leaf, Zoe, Kona, Model S.

Oil refineries use lots of heat, but very little electricity.

Figure 0.1-0.2 kWh/gallon. It’s not uncommon for a refinery to generate their own electricity. Some even export to the grid.

Not US and Canadian oil refineries.
Do you have a special refinery you’re referring to?
Because almost all use huge amounts of outside electric power to cook their gunk.

That’s an urban myth. Flint Hills MN is a large US refinery (owned by Koch Industries, no less!) that historically processed very heavy crude from Canada that requires more upgrading than the typical US mix. 339k bpd is 593,000 gallons per hour.

“The Flint Hills refinery requires roughly 120 MW of power, 24 hours a day to operate,”
https://energynews.us/2016/07/19/midwest/minnesota-refinery-plans-major-combined-heat-and-power-project/

120 MW / 593,000 gallons = 0.2 kWh/gallon

It’s not always so easy to find electricity usage data for a single refinery, but if you dig into it you’ll find my 0.1-0.2 kWh range is correct.

And what about the number of Gallons of Diesel, Heating Oil, Jet A and Jet B it produces, as well as Auto Gasoline? Are they above that 593,000 Gallons figure, or are they a part of it?

And did you count the % of those Gallons not sold to retail, but reused internally for the Cracking Process?

Or the Electricity used in getting the Oil Through a Pipeline, TO the Refinery? Or to extract it from the Ground? Or the (Refined) Diesel used to power the Locomotives that dragged Train Loads of Tanker Cars to feed it, if not fed by a Pipeline?

Or the Wasted Flare Gas burning on the Tower (that is adding more than just CO2 to the air, you can be sure!)?

And, this is a program to increase their efficiency, by using combined Cycle Heat and Power Processes, which, it seems, is finally using decades old advances to improve their operating costs! Are all refineries doing the same?

They used to flare 24/7. Nowadays they use the excess ng to run steam turbines for energy. They probably do still flare some. Haven’t been there is a while.

They used to flare 24/7. Nowadays they use the excess ng to run steam turbines for energy. They probably do still flare some. Haven’t been there is a while. Looked it up.
“The Pine Bend refinery is an industry leader in flare management. Flares are essential pieces of safety equipment used to burn excess gases that can otherwise build up in the pipes and towers of a facility when it shuts down, loses power, or has other technical issues. Flint Hills Resources has invested in new technology – a flare gas recovery system – to greatly reduce its flaring by recovering excess gases that would otherwise be flared and cycle them back through their processing units.”

In regard to flaring which has increased dramatically under Trump, $1.5 billion wasted just in TX, due to flaring this past year. NG actually went negative in the area as drillers were selling it for -25 cents/cf just to get rid of it. Or leaking it on purpose. So look at refinery from TX or LA, and you will find a much more average sort of refinery.

Tried to edit my comment, but time has elapsed.

You forgot bunker fuel.

Of course the 593k gallons includes all fuels. It’d be idiotic to say a refinery uses X kWh to produce gasoline and 0 kWh to produce diesel, jet fuel, etc.

Refinery output gallons typically exceed input gallons (see ‘refinery gain’). And we’re talking about refining, not upstream, so stop with the misdirection.

Not all refineries use cogen. But cogen is irrelevant to this debate – the point is Flint Hills MN used 0.2 kWh/gallon before they ever even applied for a permit to add cogen. As a high complexity refinery, its electricity use is on the high side.

A refinery would quickly go bankrupt using 5-6 kWh/gallon as claimed by professional liars. Crack spreads are way too low to support such a cost.

I’ve been there a bunch of times. They have reduced pollution mainly as a result of stringent MN pollution rules. It’s a model refinery, certainly not the norm.
“Heavy Canadian crude costs more to squeeze into fuel than light sweet oil, the U.S. mainstay. It contains more sulfur and requires a more complicated refining process. Flint Hills, owned by Wichita-based Koch Industries, has spent around $2 billion in the last decade to improve the efficiency of its heavy crude refining, Reint said.”

You’re both wrong. Most refineries get most of the energy needed to refine petroleum by burning byproducts and waste products. Yes, it’s an EV advocacy myth that most or all the energy needed to run a refinery comes from electricity. In truth, only a small fraction of the power comes from electricity. (But still, if we’re doing a well-to-wheel energy efficiency analysis, all that energy should be counted, because burning all that waste product is producing greenhouse gasses.)

But very few refineries export electrical power to the grid. That’s just as rare as a refinery which imports massive amounts of electrical power from a nearby electric power plant. Both types do exist, but only as outliers, quite far from the norm or the average.

“But very few refineries export electrical power to the grid. ”

The local electric utility generally doesn’t want the competition. It’s unfortunate, as wider use of CHP would reduce fossil fuel burn and CO2. Of course the very long term goal is to eliminate refineries. Until then, it would be smarter to use CHP than not.

Heh. This is flat out wrong.

Per the googles


According to an EPA EnergyStar report on oil refineries, in 2005 many refineries were very inefficient, and that in any case only 15% of refinery “energy” consumption is electricity. That means, if it’s 6 kiloWatt-hours per gallon of “energy” that it’s actually 0.9 kiloWatt-hours of electricity per gallon of gasoline.”

It also means that of that other 85% that is not “Electricity”, it is consumed operating Energy, from the Product itself: Liquid Fuels that never leave the Refinery to be sold to an end user, but are consumed up front, internally, in Heat Processes need to “Crack” the Crude! (Basically, Boil the Crude, and condense Vapors to get Kerosene, Diesel, Gasoline, #2 Heating Oil, and Bunker Sea (Heavy Marine Fuel, for Ships), plus Asphalte, which remains! It also pulls out various grades of Lubricating Oils, and other Chemical Condensates, from the processes!

Ship Engineers that I have spoken with and listened to, argue that they are “Helping” Refineries, by using the “Marine Fuel”, a sticky honey like material that needs to be heated to about 260 degrees F, just to get it fluid enough to Pump it through the Ships Engine Injectors, to power the ships engines! (They use Diesel to start the Engines, and rin the Exhaust Through the Fuel Storage Bunkets, to warm it up, and they are required to run Diesel in many Ports now, too! They argue that they are using an otherwise “Waste” product, hence they “Help” Refineries!

British Refinery: Proud of how much power it uses from the Grid! See Robert Llewelens video!

So Mazda is STILL stuck with it’s head in the sand.
This is not going to end well for them, I think it will be time to say our goodbyes shortly.

Sayonara Mazda, Toyota you’re next.

I would really love to see VW decimating the sales of toyota on the mass market with BEVs. Like Model S decimated the sales of Lexus. A beautiful thing to watch.

The rise and fall of the Great Japanese Auto Industry.

If VW sells their production all legacy will be tripping over themselves in 5 years trying to produce more BEVs…

It will be very nice if mazda disappears. This will be a beautiful lesson for the rest of the stubborn coots. Sales tanked already.

It is really hard for the existing auto companies to change direction. Most of all the moving parts, parts that wear, and parts that need to be replaced are related to the engine from intake to exhuast. Without an engine, a car can be simple to make and maintain. A car like an EV will require a different dealer model besides the car itself. I find it more likely that a well funded new cmpany will do at least as well as the existing auto companies in the future.

Stealership model has come and gone.we are in the 21st century, time for Old Auto to kick the bucket.

which makes it real interesting to see how VW navigates the dealership model.

VW made all of their EU dealers sign new contracts a couple of months ago in advance if their BEV push ..

To yo : wow, really? Interesting. Is it something about chargers or EV courses for the sales people?

JLR has trained most of their sales force on the I-Pace and the one I know (play on the same bridge team) is right behind their push into EV’s. He turned up at the Bridge Club last week in a Blue I-Pace. He loves driving it.
From his attitude, I don’t see any reluctance towards selling them.
Now if only I had the money…

They did and change the dealership model.
-Under the program, VW and its dealer network will develop a joint internet platform to handle the entire purchasing process. The system will include vehicle and feature selection, financing, payment and used car trade-ins.
-Customers and shoppers will receive unique identification names, which VW says will allow it to provide customized, around-the-clock support. This could include special offers, over-the-air software updates for existing customers and access to VW’s One Digital We Platform for car-sharing and other new mobility services.
-VW says the changes will allow its sales team to be more flexible, efficient and customer-focused.
https://cdn.motor1.com/images/mgl/q3jxZ/s1/future-vw-dealership.jpg

Mazda= Zoom -Zoom-ZOOM into Oblivion.

Wow ! , that lump of metal has so much plumbing and orifices it would make a plumber blush.

Exactly. What looked like beauty and technical excellence 10 years ago, now, looks like futility. Unneeded complexity. At a point in time, before the lithium battery, this skill was admirable. Now, it looks like chasing a dead end into the dark night of oblivion.

> We think Mazda is making a really bad choice here by sticking with gas and diesel over electric.
> In just a few years, this decision could kill the brand.

Sadly, I agree with you on that.

The thing with Mazda is that they’re already one of the smaller of the major OEMs; making a major strategic blunder like this could indeed drive them into irrelevance remarkably quickly.

Being smaller should give them the flexibility to pivot to a new architecture more quickly and easily than the giants, which makes it even more unfortunate that they’re choosing not to.

The quotes given in the article say that Mazda aren’t convinced of the green credentials of electric (at least not in all markets), which is why they’re sticking with with ICE. The problem for them here is that the carbon mix of the electricity grid worldwide is changing rapidly; what they’re saying now is unlikely to be true in ten years time. So maybe they’d want to be selling electric cars then? But if they wait ten years before switching to electric, they’ll be so far behind the curve by then that they’ll never catch up.

Exactly, they could just see what Jaguar is doing with the I-pace for example (although it’s even a smaller company than Mazda). But they apparently choose the countrary.

And Jaguar is another company whose reputation rests on a great engine in its past. Yet its new Indian owners have a refreshing lack of sentimentality.

US grid mix becomes about 1% more renewable energy year. That’s significant over time, but not “rapid”.

Fossil mix and co2 are growing in places like Germany and Japan as they shut down nukes.

Who Funds Mazda?
Who holds Mazda shares.
Is it Old Japanese Businesses?

The Kaetsu.
Who makes up the Kaetsu? The suppliers of Mazda Engines, Transmissions, Exhaust Systems, Engine cooling systems. All Obsolete.

The Kaetsu is forcing Mazda to commit Seppuku.

What they are missing, is that EVs are not just about lower emissions and being green. They are more fun to drive, and quieter.

EVs also have more zoom.

It’s a real shame. Mazda is the only Japanese vehicle manufacturer that is building beautiful vehicles at the lower price points today.

Mazda is so performance oriented that in the ’90s it had three different sports cars in production, though one was a Japan-only mid-engined microcar. Mazda has never been the most practical Japanese marque, more like the Alfa Romeo of Japan.

Some car companies have so built their public reputation on their prowess in designing internal combustion engines that they may have an internal culture unable to change. BMW, Honda and Mazda have very engine-centric reputations from years past. BMW is trying to push rather mild hybrids to keep the engines in most of its production. Honda is the strange one, pushing fuel cells that have no historical resonance with its history. Mazda is playing out the string; it’s worked every angle on pistons and Wankels to try to deal with regulations and consumption.

I would hate to see Mazda die. My dad was a jet engine mechanic for the USAF. He owned both 1st and 2nd generation turbo Corvairs, and a Mazda RX-2; they held no fears for him and that makes me affectionate towards those cars.

Gasoline and diesel are cleaner than electricity in some ares….unless you start counting the electricity needed to produce than gasoline and diesel. One oil refinery takes as much electricity as a medium sized city. Plus there’s the fact that most of the energy in gasoline or diesel is wasted in heat. Electric vehicles are 80%+ efficient.

There is nowhere in the U.S. where gasoline and diesel is cleaner than electricity. This is simply factually wrong.

The U.S. is not the only country in the world.

Worlwide similar pattern.

Hi S’toon,

After reviewing U.S. government data on fuel economy from the EPA, and emissions profiles by state from the EIA, I’ll revise my statement to say that there is one state in the U.S., where gas and electric have basically equal emissions profiles for passenger car transport.

Wyoming has the dirtiest electricity in the country at 2.08lbs of CO2/kWh power.

I looked at the efficiency data for cars on the market that have both EV and gas versions. For the gas versions, I used the highest efficiency version available. Here’s what I determined are the CO2lbs/mile emissions profiles for each of them in Wyoming:

2018 Fiat 500 EV .62lbs vs gas .66lbs
2018 Nissan Leaf .62lbs vs gas (Versa) .58lbs
2018 KIA Soul EV .64lbs vs gas .72lbs
2018 Ford Focus EV .64lbs vs gas .58
2014 Toyota RAV4 EV .91 vs gas .76

In CA it’s a different story:
2018 Fiat 500 EV .16lbs
2018 Nissan Leaf .16lbs
2018 KIA Soul EV .16lbs
2018 Ford Focus EV .16lbs
2014 Toyota RAV4 EV .47lbs

I have the impression the Japanese govt runs a contest for the most idiotic cars ever made… from this mazda thing to hydrogen passenger cars. Bonus is given for utter ugliness.

Mazda’s decision to invest in advanced Diesel is a step in the right direction. I admire their strategic decision and I strongly believe it will pay off well. Diesel’s demise in passenger and SUV segment is a fallacy that you are made to believe by a few magazine authors. The market dynamics ang logic dictate otherwise.

Yes, a step in the right direction called oblivion ahahah. And then, it is also completely illogical. Not long ago they were thinking to ditch diesel in Europe, a region of the world where it has ever been more popular than in other continents. So, they wanna try to introduce diesel in places where it isn’t widespread? Good luck 😂

And what logic and market dynamic is that?

Pls do share with us the great wisdom and knowledge other OEM’s, much larger diesel promotes of past have not seen….

Yeah because every week yet another city or province considers to ban diesels or ICE in general… You buy their diesel…. Good luck.

Where are they going to sell these diesel cars? US drivers (besides trucking industry) won’t touch diesel. That was before diesel-gate. You think China is going to allow diesels going forward? That’s the 2 biggest car markets in the world. Not to mention major European cities are already talking about banning diesels.

So you’re saying flat-out that European cities aren’t planning to ban diesels downtown? Because no European company in its right mind would rely on small diesel cars (as they now do) under that legal cloud. China can read the same medical research as the Europeans on particulates and NOX. And diesel cars never took hold in North America or Japan. So where are the sales going to come from?

Mazda mostly competes in the value segment. EVs compete best in the premium sedan/CUV and performance car segment (big engine, smaller fuel tank).

For now. As costs decline the entry level EV will get cheaper and cheaper. A used 200 mile EV in a few years will be a better value than a new Mazda. especially when you consider the cost of “fuel” and maintenance.

True, and then when cheaper ev’s hit the market and used ev’s? What then will Mazda do.

I’m all for doing your own thing but Mazda is shooting themselves in the foot. Mazda is still trying to keep small cars and sedans relevant when even Ford and Chevrolet cannot. It took them forever to put the turbo on the cx5 it’s best seller and now they’re late in adopting a hybrid.

Well i guess they can just change their tagline “we are Mazda” to “we were Mazda” when filing in bankruptcy court.

Who were they? Mazda Who?

As an owner who loved my 1983 RX7 GSL-SE, this sole stance, if not blended with a move to PHEV’s and BEV’s, will have them soon be called “Maz-Duh!”

Mazda shows us why we need a date-certain end to the EV tax credit for all. Under current law Mazda could leverage that credit starting in 2030.

I agree apart from the fact Mazda will be mysteriously disappeared in 2030 continuing like this 👏

If they don’t start the transition, they will be gone by 2030.

We are Kodak…

Kodak is way better.

Ah, the old “regional cleanliness of electricity” strawman argument. Who’s Mazda trying to convince, us or themselves?

RIP Mazda

I looked at the ways gas is generated in different parts of the world. NOWHERE is it clean. So in that perspective, EVs are sometimes very green, sometimes less green. Gas is never green.

Bad Panda ‼️

You need a car company that will cater markets where oil is abundant and cheap and no one care about EVs like Russia, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia…And for other markets that generate their electricity mainly on coal where and EV does barely make sense until they clean their power generation. MAZDA will become the champion for these markets. Crystal clear business plan.

It’s only a matter of time until backward countries also start to use EVs in a big way, it will take a bit longer than North America, Europe and China but not so much. It would be very silly for Mazda to think that.

EVs will make major market penetration in third-world countries only where the electric grid is reliable. Those who live in regions where they can’t depend on getting electricity on any day, or where they get it for only a few hours a day, won’t be selling many BEVs. Selling PHEVs might be possible there if they can compete on cost with entry-level gasmobiles; currently, they can’t.

And Saudi Arabia is investing big in Solar, since they have the money and cash flow now, but even they know Oil Won’t be Cheap to get Forever, let alone any Pollution Factors they may or may not concern themselves with!

Has anyone even heard of Mazda in those places? Hell, the Chinese EVs will arrive there at no disadvantage to Mazda in name recognition. It will come down to price vs. quality, which will push the Mazdas upmarket. Russia can build its own dinosaurs.

Look at all those lovely parts that wear out and must be serviced regularly.

Mazda is so full of that s stuff on this.

The American consumer should say “No” to Mazda.

Roll up Roll up Mazda diesels will soon have ‘divine wind’ blowing out their tailpipes as well as pollutants.

Excellent news. EV’s were 4% of the market last year and a whopping 5% this year. It’s going to be decade’s before gas and diesels are replaced. If they can be significantly improved, I’m all for it. Diesels have alot of room for improvement in both clean emissions and fuel efficiency. EV’s are not taking over the market or replacing gas and diesels for decade’s. More choices for the consumer is always better.

Hmmmmm, that is because a relative cheap version with 200+ miles have not entered the market yet. Model 3 this year has been a huge success. It has only just begun. It will grow exponentially within 5 years.

“Clean diesel” engines are a myth and a fraud, and that’s not going to change in the future. It may not be impossible, but it certainly is impractical.

No, the whole argument for buying diesels was that gas engines couldn’t approach diesel’s thermal efficiency – which is half that of a turbine generating local electricity. The diesel isn’t going to go way higher than it is now. And the medical research on particulates and NOX in high-population neighborhoods like European cities is a rising tide like research on sports head injuries.

It’s only been a couple of years since EVs were 1% of the market. Diesels are like coal – they’re the fraction that gets replaced first.

I’m always surprised to hear that “Company A makes 10 million ICE cars/year therefore they can quickly transition to EVs whenever they wish.” I don’t think that’s the case. That would only be true if there is significant crossover between the manufacturing techniques. Nobody says Toyota makes 10 million cars so they can built an aircraft factory and compete in 2 or 3 years! It’s clear that the bulk of EV battery production is already committed to one company or the other and it will take several years to spin up new capacity.

Yeah, at best “they can quickly transition to EVs whenever they wish” is wishful thinking on the part of die-hard gearheads. At worst it’s pravduh and EV bashing.

Everyone off on crazy tangents here.
Mazda makes only explosion based vehicles. Mazda will not change.
When my 3 lease was up this spring I bought a used leaf….
They were flabbergasted at the dealership that I want to know about their electric car offering. I was just trolling those assholes and their horrid sales tactics, but they would have had a sale if they had an electric car.

I do the same at Toyota.

A Fatal Logic Error: The Company is committed to Diesel. The PUBLIC is not. The public does not like cancer causing micro particles to be released, spewed, into the atmosphere. Especially the city environment.

Sure, if Mazda only sold cars to rural customers that would drive only in rural areas, diesel would still be a solution. But, that’s typically not Japan.

“Dumb-da-dumb-dumb”

Famous last words. But he doesn’t care because he will probably get a golden parachute on his way out, when the company gets bankrupt and most of its investors lose a ton of money.

That stance did’t hold water a decade ago. At this point in time, the weakest argument I can imagine. The areas of the world Mazda is referring to, the ones still using outdated coal plants to generate electricity are also choking on the exhaust fumes from the ICE. They will benefit the most from the transition to BEV’s.

Continuing to justify investing millions, hundreds of millions of dollars in diesel technology and an increase in gasoline engines efficiency by 30% is to ignore reality. Are they completely unaware of the billions already sunk into that endeavor by the rest of the automotive industry. It’s not that improvements can not be made. It’s the cost benefit ratio that is now sliding rather rapidly down the scale of commoditization in batteries. In five years time there will be a very compelling BEV costing 25K with over 200 miles of range. Not a low production slow charging compliance car. If you think the reservations for the Model 3 was impressive, the next step down market will be a killer. Mazda is chasing a dead market.

And Nissan basically just dropped further development on the Leaf, and Toyota and Honda are nonexistent in the electric market. This is a Japanese disease, odd since Japan was ahead of the market in developing hybrid power trains.

Mazda can focus on ICE because, like Subaru, they can rely on Toyota for electrification. I’m not surprised with the criticism Toyota gets here, Toyota is not an early adopter of anything. They are a conservative company that prioritizes long-term reliability over leading-edge but unproven technology. Their mostly consistent top performance in Consumer Reports reliability rankings show this. I have seen them overly-criticized for lack of innovation from DCTs to diesels to turbos and now BEVs, yet they have made the right calls so far. I’ll take a guess at why they seem hesitant on BEVs, at least in its current state. Many parts of Japan are colder longer than warm. They could be more aware and sensitive to the heating inefficiency issue with BEVs, and a 20-30% range reduction or more in the cold season could be unacceptable to them. They could be waiting on both battery and heating technology that is more efficient in cold temperatures. Another issue is the current state of fast charging, which long term is not good for lithium-ion. They could be waiting on something that fast-charges and also doesn’t degrade the battery much. In both cases, I’m sure they are actively looking into… Read more »

Mazda’s the Blackberry (Research in Motion) of cars.

What a pity, I really love their designs…

Time for Japanese government to investigate whether Mazda CEO has investments in oil company stocks and arrest him and strip his CEO post.

Mazda has fallen behind Subaru and already Suzuki has pulled out of US & China markets. Mazda’s sales in China are falling as Chinese are buying more EVs. They will quite China soon followed by USA later.

We are waiting to see Nio ES6 for Dec-15 reveal, this is going to be a more affordable mass selling EV.

Point is, Japanese governement is probably nodded in oil. I didn’t think about that just a few months ago until I realized Toyota, Mazda, Subaru, Suzuki, Infiniti, Lexus, Honda… all of them don’t sell electric cars, and even Nissan, why is waiting so long to introduce 60 kWh Leaf? Ghosn was just the perfect excuse to delay it.

Yea, so Lexus heroes hybrids, Suzuki has an EV Swift coming, Honda’s NSX was a hybrid. But sure, don’t let facts get in the way of some good old fashioned “Oil industry owns the Govt’ angst-posting.

Who cares about hybrids anymore?

People who are capable of seeing shades of grey? Or seeing beyond the American market?

That’s very far from reality. Japan has always been energy-poor, with a distinct lack of petroleum or coal reserves. The reason Japan isn’t eager to embrace BEVs is that their country already has an electricity shortage, largely due to the panicked overreaction to the Fukishima disaster: permanently shutting down nearly all their commercial nuclear power plants. The shortage of electricity also helps explain why Japan has tried to promote the “hydrogen economy”, despite its utter impracticality. That’s a mark of desperation, not so much conspiring with Big Oil.

If there is one country where the government is not in the pocket of Big Oil, it’s Japan.

Uh, I thought that nuclear reactors were going to be the miracle cure for cheap electrolysis by direct heating. All the nuke cultists told me so. If Japan shut down its reactors why didn’t anyone see that would wreck the economics of a hydrogen economy?

The Japanese government wont do anything. They push their own conflicts of interest. Japan government has significant investments in Natural Gas, hence their hydrogen economy push.

It’s certainly noticeable that natural gas suppliers are prominent backers of the “hydrogen economy” hoax in Japan. But I still think it has much more to do with Japan’s chronic shortage of petroleum and coal, and the present shortage of electricity, than any lobbying by natural gas suppliers.

Bottom Line: Tesla has Won.

The problem is, the public is still sheep and most need to see “normal” brand names like Jaguar on EVs to believe it’s really happening. Between the Nissan coup and GM’s various excuses to shut off EVs, we’re becoming entirely reliant on the Europeans and Hyundai/Kia to normalize them. Even Musk wants to see more brands make EVs because he knows it actually helps to promote Teslas as a realistic American option.

Meanwhile, it will take Tesla a staggering amount of capital to exploit this victory. We must hope the global financial oligarchy is as upset about the denialism of the mainstream automakers as we are here. If there’s another financial crash, they will decide who gets cut off first.

Given the fact that this guy has to lie about electric cars and electricity in general, the situation must really tragic or maybe a more comedian one. Good luck with the “honest” introduction of their diesel and diesel-like engines.

Mazda is slow on the uptake of EVs like most ICE carmakers, however competition is good for both ICE and EV makers.
will their Skydrive petrol engines will compete against mild hybrid technology?
Will their rotary engine range extender be an improvement on existing plug in hybrids and offer a better stopgap until battery technologies improve sufficiently and or prices fall?

I love rotary engines, but that’s when they’re directly operating performance cars. A range extender doesn’t solve the combustion problems of Wankels unless it can use stratified-charge ignition or maybe even air seals and crazy high RPMs. And the smaller you make it, the worse the thermal losses. So maybe adiabatic operation, meaning ceramic parts.

I love Mazda’s thinking. EV technology hasn’t evolved to the point where it will render the ICE obsolete. It still has a lot of growing up to do.

Bye bye.

You can make up all sorts of reasons why the ice will continue to be chosen for personal transportation in the future, but they are all wrong. Aside from simply being superior on every level: efficiency, pollution, torque, handling and ride, many countries, cities, and municipalities, will start banning the ice/diesels soon, as some already have. EVs are clearly superior. It’s an argument that has already been lost by legacy auto and big oil, and those who continue to pursue it will just be wasting their time and money.
Don’t waste yours by buying one.

My 1999 Civic gives me 32 MPG my 2015 Civic gives me 34 MPG on other hand battery cost and energy density improves 7-10% year, looking at history thing don’t look rosy in ICE department.

Not going to buy a Mazda ever.

Mazdasaurus…soon on display at your local museum

Seriously, Mazda is still beating the dead horse of “clean diesel”? 🙄

Well, it’s inevitable that some well-known auto makers won’t survive the EV revolution. In every disruptive tech revolution, some of the former market leaders don’t survive.

And it looks very much like Mazda is volunteering to be one of them.

Mazda could very well be the first to disappear, or maybe Subaru or Suzuki.

Suzuki is build an electric Swift.

Suzuki is a microcar specialist, so you’re dealing with the specific economics of urban cars in Asia. Maybe that can work, but it’s going to either slug it out with the Chinese, or more likely cut a deal with someone in China to make much of the car.

Almost every automaker will produce an electric model in 5 years time, at that point I don’t think is enough to still exist after a few years. You have to make big numbers, so compelling EVs. The old days of compliance only electric cars are finished.

I’m guessing fossil fuel lobbiest most walk the corridors of governments leaving a trail of money on the floor. If you just dropped money on the floor it’s not bribing is it?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/polluters-in-the-room-big-energy-undermining-un-climate-talks/ar-BBQiW6h?ocid=spartandhp