Toyota Gives Up On Pure Electric Vehicles



At first you don’t succeed, You give up?

Toyota is done with electric vehicles and is now shifting towards hydrogen fuel cell vehicles.

Toyota's Fuel Cell Sedan

Toyota’s Fuel Cell Sedan

The two currently made Toyota EVs, Scion iQ minicar and RAV4 EV will most likely be out with a fuel cell powered Toyota vehicle claimed to be in showrooms in 2015.

Oddly, Toyota’s Head of Research & Development, Mitsuhisa Kato added:

“The cruising distance is so short for EVs, and the charging time is so long. At the current level of technology, somebody needs to invent a Nobel Prize-winning type battery.”

CEO of Toyota’s North American region, Jim Lentz added:

“A select way, in short-range vehicles that take you that extra mile… But for long-range travel primary vehicles, we feel there are better alternatives, such as hybrids and plug-in hybrids, and tomorrow with fuel cells.”

What is even more interesting is the price of Toyota’s first FCV, believed to be ~ $70,000, which is the same starting price of the all-electric Tesla Model S, a vehicle with ample range and extremely quick charging times (Supercharger).  The Model S basically counters everything bad Toyota says in regards to pure EVs.  The BEV technology is there, but Toyota chooses to ignore it, instead focusing on promoting fuel cell vehicles.

Our question is: Could you justify paying $70,000 for Toyota’s FCV when the Model S is available at the same price point?

Source: RTT News

Categories: Toyota

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

99 Comments on "Toyota Gives Up On Pure Electric Vehicles"

newest oldest most voted

Answer: No. There are no hydrogen fuel stations now or even in the future. We are witnessing the beginning of the end for the world largest car maker…

California is paying $200M to build 100 H2 stations, and it’s all but a done deal. But even then, H2 has no chance.

Good thing Toyota isn’t giving up on PHEV, though. Their free piston generator looks great.

Really? That’s ridiculous. For $200M you could put in 20,000 EV charging startions and really change the face of the EV market in CA. Instead they get 100 fuel cell stations that no one will use. Awesome.

Toyota-saurus Rex?


I think all Toyota want to say is:
Dear customer, please don’t even think about buying a BEV now. We are not there yet. The “future” might be different. Wait a few years. We have almost solved it.
Toyota’s future was supposed to be hybrids and now they see it threatened by BEVs.

What does it cost (or will it cost) to fill up on hydrogen?

Currently, it costs more per unit of hydrogen than the equivalent unit of gasoline. Yes, it’s MORE expensive, plus the far more expensive car.

Hydrogen is more expensive and it’s also produced with fossil fuels. It’s possible to create hydrogen through other means, but it’s more efficient to just produce electricity.

California could complete the West Coast Electric Highway for a relatively low investment compared to the fuel it would save, but perhaps they don’t have an incentive to do that as it would reduce their revenues from fossil fuel taxation.

This is REALLY old news that was only news that has been presented here more than once. We knew in 2010 when Toyota signed the deal with Tesla that it was for exactly 2600 Rav4 EV’s. That never changed. The “big six” Large Vehicle Manufacturers (LVM) auto manufacturers of the world (Toyota, Honda, Nissan, GM, Ford, Fiat/Chrysler) were required to begin the modern day CARB-ZEV rules, starting in 2012. That’s is exactly what Toyota did with Rav4 EV. They will produce 2600 Rav4 EV’s for model years 2012-2014. Toyota sells about 300,000 cars per year in California, therefore over three years, there are 900,000 oil burner cars sold. The current rule of 0.79% credits of Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) sales means 7110 credits must be earnd over the three model years, 2012-2014. Each Rav4 EV earns 3 credits each, so 7110 divided by 3 credits per car equals 2370 battery electric Rav4 EV’s solve that over the three model years. But, the new 9 credit hydrogen car needs only 790 individual sales over three model years, or 263 per each model year during 2015 – 2017. By 2025, however if the 9 credits for hydrogen are retained (they are scheduled… Read more »

Tony, do you know what people have been paying for RAV4 EVs lately? By what I understand, they are going for much less than the $50K sticker (or whatever it is) but at around what price?

The lease is currently about $500 per month, zero down, unlimited mileage. You can buy it at the end of 36 months for under $20k:

The official Toyota offering:


FYI I purchased a 2012 Rav4 EV from S.F. Toyota for $35K, including tax, license, and a bumper to bumper warranty until 2020. Love the vehicle! Had 9K on the odometer. Cost $5.22 a full charge which is good for 110 miles.

So the jist is that CARB’s 9 credits per Hydrogen car is screwing the Zero Emission Vehicle credit system up…

Luckily the rest of north america is in no rush for hydrogen.

Why would anyone buy a $70k FCEV with 400km range when they can get a $70k EV with 400km range with almost free fill ups all over the country?

Thanks for laying it out. Toyota will be busy with each of the ZEV states to be sure the 3.3 million, by 2025, goal pays as high a ransom as possible (9 per?) for any hydrogen they can squeeze. There are no explicit hydrogen credit structures away from CA (I know of), but the key word is “yet”. By 2025, half the states will be near/past their interim EPA CO2 targets. The proceeds from those adopting regimes are apt to be used to buy FCEV infrastructure, just as they are currently being used to fund some of the PHEV rebates. As far as I know, Toyota still has the Union of Concerned Scientists, and perhaps more environmental constituency in its camp. Of course, they also have fossil (natural gas feedstocks). Many don’t think autos will be affected by the new EPA power plant rule, but they are. It’s an 800+mm revenue source in CA. That’s on $12-13 per ton CO2 prices. In the Northeast, my understanding is they could creep up to $17/ton (under RGGI), leading to revenue streams that will be used to do anything, home insulation, storm levies, transportation. Its gonna be a food fight for those funds.

Range is over evaluated. I like driving in holidays with my Leaf, 400 km. No problem with relaxing charging stops. And if I wants go faster I can borrow a car or take the rail. Hydrogen cars needs much more electricity, they have same bad efficient like oil cars in total!!! Same high hydrogen costs, and expensive. Thats no option in future , only if you have 100 % renewable electricity.
Hope strong EV’s goes on, 1000 Tesla in China last month. And really, who would prefer a Toyota if he could take a Tesla!
Go Tesla, and bring the EV’s to success.

It is interesting that Japan’s #1 & #2 car makers are taking drastically different approaches.

I’m all for H2 vehicles – as long as they don’t consume any tax dollars.

Meh . . . I’d let them have the same incentives as EVs to let them have a chance. But Japanese $20K incentive is ridiculous.

I’m not concerned about whether tax money is being used. That’s one of the fundamental driving forces behind taxation: for the people of a nation to pool their resources for increasing the efficiency of technological development and adoption thereof.

And, it is completely irrelevant if a given technology ends up being a dead-end. There are lessons to be learned and insights to be gained that often apply to other technologies.

I just can’t see the gains from spending $200 million on hydrogen refueling stations in California.

I might not mind so much if and only if they sequester the CO2 produced during the reformation process.

Tesla, GM, BMW, Ford, VW, and Nissan should be smiling. This is their opportunity to steal sales from the top dog.

Unfortunately, all Toyota owners I have conversed with don’t buy it for specs, features, price, or any of the important stuff.
They buy it because “it’s a Toyota, it must be good/reliable!”


I used to be one of those folks. I bought strictly Toyota for the last 25 years.

Not any more. It’s EV’s all the way for me.

I didn’t drive a Toyota for 10 years, I drove a Prius.

The plug-in Prius turned out to be a joke, so I switched to the Renault-Nissan camp for a full EV.

i think that Lentz is right; i am not a big believer in the BEV as a commercially viable product. i think that the best option is the PHEV. i agree that you don’t really need 200 miles of range for everyday driving, and the reason why you want 300+ miles of range on a full tank in an ICE vehicle is so that you don’t have to run to the gas station every day. electric vehicles are a different paradigm because you can recharge overnight at home. so you would nominally need to only have enough range for normal daily driving. the problem with electric vehicles is that you do have to have the ability to anticipate cases where you will need to drive more than the normal daily range. while some might say that they would just borrow or rent a car in those instances, that’s easy to say until you actually have to do it, because the reality is that few people would want to deal with that kind of inconvenience. it is also easy to say that all a person has to do is “find” a supercharger station if they need additional range while they are… Read more »

When I take my hybrid on a trip, I still have to plan ahead – where I’m going to get gas, stretch my legs, maybe eat (depending on the time of day that I’m leaving and how far I have to go). When I replace my hybrid with the Model III, my planning will not increase, or appreciably change at all. In fact, the planning will be simpler because I’ll just stop at the conveniently-located superchargers, which are always next to food and other amenities.

There are many desolate stretches of interstates where there are few amenities, if any, and gas stations are hard to scare up – 68, 70, 80, 81, 84 – it isn’t all like the PA Turnpike or the northern half of 95…

My point being, if you are going to take a trip beyond the single-charge range of a Tesla, planning is still necessary.

*beyond the range of a Tesla, in any car, not just an EV,…

Ever heard of flying? 😉

you are very different from me because i *don’t* plan where i am going to stop. i determine when to stop by looking at the gas gauge…of course, if there are road signs that say “no services for 80 miles”, then i’ll make a decision on the fly as to whether to stop. but it is definitely not something that i plan in advance.

what is more relevant to me is the scenario in which i end up having to drive more than usual locally, because the store that has the goods i want is in a far suburb; maybe i have to go to more than one suburb. that is a scenario that involves far more driving than is normal; i don’t want to have to engage in a planning exercise before i walk out the door – i just want to be able to get what it is that i want to get, where i need to go to get it.

this is really easy, I’m now on my 2nd year with:
(2) EVs (rav4 and Leaf)
(1) Minivan

There is no planning. My wife and I work fulltime, we use the 2 EVs. If we have to go out of town, we use the old minivan. Plain and simple. You can get a used ICE car (if your household doesn’t already have one)… they can be had for cheap at the nearest CarMax. Our Leaf is a lease, and it basically pays for itself with the many miles I drive everyday for work/errands/etc.

Interesting. I would say, you are making a sacrifice. During your long pleasure drives, you are stuck with your old gas car which has more chance of a break down. If range wasn’t a concern, would you not like to drive the same new cars you are using everyday?

I bought an EV and also kept my gas car for long rides. But it got painful to park, clean, check tire pressure and pay extra insurance. No matter how much you drive, you still need to change the oil once in while.
So, I think PHEVs without range concerns are the winners. It could be a Plug-in Fuel-cell EV, which gets you best of both worlds. You rarely will use H2, so cost of hydrogen is moot. Also, the fuel cell engine will last way longer. Instead of packing extra 60 KWH of battery that you rarely use, you carry around a fuel cell and a hydrogen tank, which are much lighter.

Maybe in the future, things will change when alternative fuel cars will become the mainstream. For now, I just cant justify why an FCEV would make sense since the cost of it is the same ballpark as a Tesla. Most households that are getting EVs probably have a ICE car as a secondary vehicle, right? Why not keep using that just for long trips and save yourself the depreciation of getting rid of it. You worry about maintenance, etc… why? Our mininvan (a 2009 VW Routan) still runs like a champ, only has 40K miles on the odometer, and I barely pay maintenance for it since we rarely use it. It has been nearly a year since I haven’t had the oil changed (mobil-1)… because it hasn’t gotten past the 5K recommended interval for synthetic oil change yet. We got it brand new (back in 09), so it has been very reliable and I’m not worried about it all getting us stuck in the middle of nowhere. I might replace it with an Outlander PHEV when it finally gets to the US market. But for now, we are keeping it as it’s already fully paid off.

OK, a 2009 model year is not really old. I guess, you meant old compared to your EVs. Yeah, if you can afford to keep 3 cars, that’s fine. Most families will find it hard to keep 1 extra car, as it costs money.

in a household that pulls in, say $100K/year annual income, I don’t see how you can’t afford to keep 2 cars in the garage (as long as you have good credit). A leased Nissan Leaf pays off for itself in terms of monthly upkeep, due to the cost savings and low lease payments. For example, I pay $200/mo on my lease, that’s cheaper than what I paid on fuel and maintenance cost of my ICE car prior to getting an EV.

100K annual income???! Excepting for high cost of living locations, I think a 40K annual income can sustain acquiring an EV valued under $35K before incentives.

Regardless of income, pretty much anyone driving 1000 miles per month in an ICE will find an economic advantage to driving an EV instead. 1000 miles/month is not a ‘hard limit,’ as the specific amount depends what the MPG is of the ICE and the cost of gasoline.

“i am not a big believer in the BEV as a commercially viable product”

Tesla already sells every Model S for more than it cost them to build it. Isn’t that the definition of a commercially viable product?

Yup. And the ironic part is, Tesla is eating away at LEXUS (ie, Toyota’s) high end sales.

Buh bye, Toyota…

Not every car needs to be all things to all people. Many households have more than one vehicle, only one of which would be needed for longer trips. Why would you want to pay for an engine and deal with the added maintenance for those cars that don’t need it?

How many times in the last year have you actually driven farther than 80 miles without any advanced notice? I have not found any difficulties scheduling errands or trips when I leave directly from work around the days I ride my bicycle. Nothing has ever come up that was to far to bicycle and could not wait for me to cycle home first if needed, and even that is extremely rare.

Maybe a BEV is not the right choice for you and that is OK. This does not mean they would not be an excellent choice for many others. The Spark EV has been a great choice for me. I am glad it was an available choice. I would not have purchased a new car at all, had a small and fun BEV not been available.

“while some might say that they would just borrow or rent a car in those instances, that’s easy to say until you actually have to do it, because the reality is that few people would want to deal with that kind of inconvenience”

‘splain me inconvenience, Lucy.. (unless your under 25) I call up Enterprise and they ask me when I would like my car delivered. We pack it, we drive it, we come back home. The only time my meager synapses can imagine what Might be your point is that 2:35am emergency call, and the BEV can’t make the required distance. In that case I would phone-a-friend, or use Uber and work out what they were willing to do it for being an emergency.

We live this way now, without a BEV (yet).. not worth beating our enjoyable prized cars for what tends to be a lousy (interstate-travel) experience.

There are a lot of multi-car households right now that could replace gas cars with a mixture of both PHEV’s and EV’s and have the best of all worlds. PHEV’s and EV’s work very well together, and rarely bicker between themselves….

It is good to remember that where as Model S is superprofitable luxury car that eats Lexus LS for lunch while supercharging, Toyota’s fool cell car is a small and extremely ugly compact car that is 120 % depended on subsidies and even then no-one really wants that car and Toyota is making net loss.

Bingo. It is basically an ugly looking Corolla (even the Corolla looks better) with Prius like performance. Even Hyundai’s Fuel Cell Vehicle is far more practical.

People will buy those cars just because it say TOYOTA or HONDA. The public perceives these as “Good” car and will buy them-at least at first.

No they won’t. All fool cell cars goes for those companies that want to promote something — I really do not know what, because Fool Cell cars are perceived mostly as a joke by the public.

Toyota will sell less than 1000 fuel cell cars during the next 5 years.

Sadly, after my state of California pays $100 million to support a few thousand lease-only and crush cars, we will all look back and say, “why”?

Rodrigo Henriques Negreiros Magalhaes

“The cruising distance is so short for EVs, and the charging time is so long. At the current level of technology, somebody needs to invent a Nobel Prize-winning type battery.”

Yes, someone did and the name of the guy is ELON MUSK!

even at a supercharger station (or DC fast charge station) it takes at least 30 minutes for an 80% charge and at least an hour for a full charge. that is a long time compared to the amount of time that it takes to refill a gas tank.

Let’s be realistic. I charge every night so no stops needed. On a Trip however I stop to Fuel 5 min a quick stop for Bathroom and food 30 min. That’s 5 min more then a Tesla as you do everything at once.

I don’t think Elon Musk contributed much to battery tech. Packaging/monitoring to some extent?

While, yes, even DCQC is more time-consuming than pumping gas (although you don’t have to stay at the pump), that misses the bigger picture: with an EV, most of the “refueling” already occurs at home (or work, school, etc), effectively taking only seconds of the driver’s time, much MUCH less than a detour to a gas or hydrogen station.

Some people just don’t appreciate how game-changing home charging is. The fact that you wake up every morning to a fully charged EV means that you spend zero time waiting for it to charge and you always have a full charge ready every day. This makes even short range EVs quite manageable.

EVs with 120 to 150 mile range would work fine for the vast majority of people.

And Tesla’s 200+ mile range EVs combined with the supercharger network eliminate virtually all of range/charge issues.

“Could you justify paying $70,000 for Toyota’s FCV when the Model S is available at the same price point?”

The short answer is no.

The long answer is long and a bit complicated but I’d be happy to post it if anyone is interested (hint: it is still mostly “no” with only a couple of exceptions).

A FCEV is a PURE electric vehicle.

Oh not this argument again. (So I guess the Volt is a pure EV too?)

The Volt is mechanical driven by the ICE engine.

Meh, Scat Cat!

OnStar Data Dump Of <3% North American Chevy Volt Owners and lessees, Opted in to share data-

Many at greater then 90% Pure EV over 25,000+ miles driven, Near ZERO Gas Used!

Links Go To Volt Stats Dot Net-

1)Opt IN FLEET –

2) ME! –

3) HEH! – Stunning Cadillac ELR Extended Range Electric Luxury Coupe's –


Thomas J. Thias


Oh jeez. The i3 and Fisker then?

And so are diesel locomotives?


If you could make Diesel with electrolysis.

[Oops, catching this late…]

I fail to see how this is relevant, what matters is what goes in the vehicle, and in this case this is hydrogen, not electricity.

You can’t make H2 with just electricity either, you still need e.g. water or NG.
It doesn’t matter how badly you torture the definition of EV: a fuel-cell vehicle ain’t one.

It’s a pure hydrogen car, that’s the only fuel or energy carrier you can put in the car.

If you give it a plug too then you would at least be able to call it a PHEV. 😉

Tesla battery swapping doesn’t need a plug to drive. So Model S is not a pure EV.


They think they’re being so sneaky, gaming the system. The Model 3 is going to do to the Prius what the S is doing to Lexus sales.

Good riddance, Toyota. Never liked those fugly Corollas and Camrys. Can’t believe there is a huge segment in the population who can’t think of anything else other than Honda/Toyota.

While they are at it (or not actually), they might as well give up the Plug In Prius. It’s not a real PHEV. Too many of those damn things hogging public charging stations. How long do you need to charge a little 4kWh battery?

Was a failure from the beginning without the Tesla SuperCharger port AND network.

My job requires a bi-monthly inspection tour of several properties that are located 75 miles away. Takes about 6 hours total with a gas hog, but I would have to wait several hours on a Level 2 EVSE to make it home again if I had a RAV4.

Toyota is a member of the CHAdeMO association, and yet couldn’t be bothered to include that on this $50,000 car. It is nothing more than intentionally trying to make EV’s a failure. Listen to the blather coming out of Toyota executives almost daily… EV’s are only good for “the last mile” like their ridiculous iQ EV with 38 miles of range.

We plan to fix the lack of a DC charger on the Rav4 with the introduction of JdeMO for the Rav4 EV.


You will get a kick out of my much published adaptation of Toyata Chairman’s Corporate EV Product self assesment from the Summer of 2012.

What Toyota Chairman Uchiyamada said, summer, 2012 –

“The current capabilities of electric vehicles do not meet society’s needs, whether it may be the distance the cars can run, or the costs, or how it takes a long time to charge.”

What Toyota Chairman Uchiyamada really meant…

The current capabilities of OUR electric vehicles do not meet society’s needs, whether it may be the distance the cars can run, or the costs, or how it takes a long time to charge.

The Toyota Prius Plug In- electric plus gas range- 11+ miles? Closer to EPA rated 0-6 mile all electric range in some cases? Gasoline engine running under load?

Of course, they could always ask Elon! lol

This gets more interesting every day!


Thomas J. Thias


Well . . . The Toyota RAV4 has an electric drivetrain from Tesla and they don’t directly support Chademo. Same lack of DC-fast charging hurts the Tesla-made Mercedes B-Class as well.

Also, Fiat needs to add DC fast charging to their Fiat 500e.

toyota is retarded

Executives at Honda and Toyota should seriously consider reviving the ancient and honorable art of Sepuku. Fuel cells may be interesting technology but they will be fueled by hydrocarbons, mostly natural gas. A diesel train has electric traction motors that turn the wheels. The diesel engine cranks along at 800-1200 rpm making electricity for the electric wheel motors. But, they are not called electric trains. They are called diesel locomotives. Vehicles that run on hydrogen should be called hydrogen vehicles just like trains with electric traction motors are called diesel trains, in spite of the fact that electric traction motors actually turn the train wheels. The FCEV is really a Hydrogen vehicle and will run on fossil fuels. It runs off hydrogen, pure and simple. The easiest and most economical hydrogen comes from natural gas. Fossil fuel companies can get along with electric cars as long as they are powered by fossil fuels, namely the so-called Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle, The flippin’ fuel cell runs on hydrogen, let’s get real !! I have assumed all these years as we patiently waited for the advent of electric vehicles, that [art pf the reason for electric vehicles was to deliver us from… Read more »

A major +1

I don’t see the appeal of hydrogen cars. Why people desire hydrogen cars eludes me. IMO, most people are creatures of habit and fear change. Hydrogen cars would allow them to adopt a “clean car” without having to change their habits.
It’s like watching caged animals having their cage door left open and the animals won’t leave. They’ve been caged so long, they’re afraid of the unknown outside the “safety” of their cage walls.
Electric cars are our first steps toward emancipation from the fossil fuel industry. Don’t fear the change to EVs … be FREE.

No one will be paying $70k for this.
The most they will pay in Japan is $50k.

Disagreeing with the subsidy, although of course battery cars have had the vast majority of alternative transport subsidies, even if per car they have been less, is no excuse for misrepresentation.

Especially considering that none of this is news, just rather inaccurate editorialisation.

You know way more than Toyota about how to build successful cars, and the engineering behind them.

We get it.

Humans have more than enough downtime to deal with an EV. My Volt just sent me an email that she is charged. Since it’s 4am, she can sleep another 4 or more hours. Last time I bought gas was over a month ago.

A ~120mi EV could do the same job in my case.

Last time I bought gas was 2 years ago this week! Imiev………..

Toyota needs to read this:

The hydrogen economy is a fallacy.

I can’t be bothered to go through item by item on the piece you linked, but the quality of the ‘logic’ can be evaluated from this: ‘The spokesmen for the hydrogen hoax claim that hydrogen will be manufactured from water via electrolysis. It is certainly possible to make hydrogen this way, but it is very expensive — so much so, that only four percent of all hydrogen currently produced in the United States is produced in this manner. ‘ Certainly it is more expensive at the moment to produce hydrogen in this way, although not massively so, and the technology is improving fast, but then it is also more expensive to produce electricity from renewables than by burning gas. Low natural gas prices in the States mean that without mandates and so on both electricity production and hydrogen production is most economically done from natural gas. That is not a show stopper for hydrogen production by other means any more than it is for electricity from renewables. Toyota have read plenty of stuff like that in your link. They are not the ignoramus’s or buffoons that you seem to imagine. In fact they are rather good at building practical cars,… Read more »

so many brilliant people who know the future.

Toyota must be extremely impressed.

Well a number of us will give up on
Toyota…. I already have.

The Hydrogen thing is just a way to maintain the oil companies status quo while being very energy wasteful.
Electricity to battery is much more efficient period.

electric batteries lack the energy density of gasoline. electricity can be intelligently used for local and daily driving; this would eliminate a large part of gasoline usage. but for traveling distances, or for doing a lot of driving in an area or region, gasoline is a better power source. the PHEV takes advantage of both power sources sources. that is why PHEVs are more practical than BEVs.

i don’t see what the advantage of hydrogen is over electricity. while electricity doesn’t have the energy density of gasoline, as i recall, neither does hydrogen. i suppose you could refill a hydrogen tank more quickly than you could recharge a battery but i have never seen anything that would indicate that you could drive that far on a tankful of hydrogen.

You have to ask the question: Would you want to drive a car with a pressurized cylindrical tank of highly explosive hydrogen?

All I know is,in our eighties,we are on our 3rd PRIUS & our 5th TOYOTA. This one is the Plug-in PRIUS. We charge it exclusively with ‘free’ electricity which we have been paid to generate,via solar panels & the innovative Baxi’Ecogen’domestic CHP c/h gas boiler=180+MP(UK)G.PERFECT replacement would be BEV(RAV4 with TESLA range?)WHY WOULD WE WANT TO PURCHASE HYDROGEN??? (OR EVEN A PHEV

Hydrogen is not the answer.

The hydrogen will, of course. be provided by the oil companies.

Case closed…..

The whole Toyota vs EV thing is overblown. If they’re producing something with a plug, I’m happy. Sure, the Plug-in Prius could definitely use a bigger battery, but it’s still enabling 10’s of thousands of people to get around largely on electrons from the grid. Articles like this detract from the plug-in movement as a whole, by making the general public think Toyota think all plug-ins are a bad idea. Even I saw this headline and had to read it twice before I realized it said specifically PURE electric vehicles.

It is not overblown. When the biggest auto company on the planet doesn’t make EVs, that is disappointing. And the PiP is pathetic . . . we all know they can do much better than that.

I think just making all 3 prius models plug in would be tremendously helpful.

Toyota makes me think of the former Irak representative that was denying the presence of US troops in Bagdad while they were passing behind him in front of the camera.
Now Toyota is denying a efficient EV is possible while the Model S is in front of their driveway.

I’ll believe that auto makers are serious about fuel cell vehicles (FCVs) when I see one making them in numbers past that of a mere “California compliance” vehicle. FCVs are a dead end, and auto makers know it. The -only- advantage they have over plug-in EVs is a faster fueling vs. charging time. In every other area, from cost of the fuel vs electricity to available places to recharge/refuel, the plug-in EV is already far ahead, and will only continue to improve. FVCs can’t improve on their ability to compete on cost with plug-in EVs, because their power is dependent on fossil fuels, which will only get more expensive and hard to find over time. The natural gas from which hydrogen fuel is made is a limited and dwindling resource. Electricity is -not- a limited resource. Furthermore, the cost of BEVs (pure battery powered EVs) will continue to fall steadily, year after year, as battery prices continue to fall. Fuel cell vehicles may come down in price a bit, but will never be anywhere as simple and easy to make as are pure EVs, so again in the long run won’t be able to compete on cost. Auto makers are… Read more »

No I couldn’t. Hydrogen cars have electric drivetrains anyway. I’d like a battery pack instead of a hydrogen tank & fuel cells and a small battery pack..

I really don’t see the appeal of Hydrogen – Fueled cars, and I don’t see the public clamoring for them either.

I was under the impression the only really cheap source of hydrogen was a Gen III + Nuclear Plant. But the long term viability of Nuclear power in general is getting more doubtful with each passing decade.

Ask the people of Fukushima Prefecture how enthralled they are with Nuclear Power these days.

So that leaves us with H2 formulated from Natural Gas. Europeans will probably not be eager to pay for hydrogen derived from high priced natural gas in their countries. Italy has tentatively solved the pricing issue by using CNG (compressed methane) directly. But that is not Hydrogen.

So what exactly is the incentive for companies to push Natural Gas derived Hydrogen down our collective throats? I’m sure there’s nothing in it for me, so then, what is in it for them? Or is this just more Greenwashing?

One thing that everyone on this site appears to have lost sight off is the increase in renewable energy coming on to the grid in some countries. When this exceeds normal demand then it’s very cheap to make hydrogen. Denmark, Germany and Ireland are already getting close to this point. When we get cheap hydrogen would you go for Hydrogen powered cars or trance Atlantic air ships? I think that more people will go for the car. Of course batteries will be more efficient so a Hydrogen plug in Hybrid Electric Vehicle may well turn out to be the best option by 2050

What’s the price of fuel and how long to refuel the Toyota FCV?