Toyota Mirai Advertisement – Fueled By Oil Creek? – Video


Toyota Mirai

Toyota Mirai

While marketing electric cars, manufacturers typically distance their products from oil, but Toyota doesn’t seem to care. Mirai isn’t even a plug-in (besides CHAdeMO in the trunk to export power), so maybe that’s why Toyota is taking a different marketing approach.

In its most recent video “Fueled by Oil Creek | Presented by Toyota Mirai,” the Japanese manufacturer takes us back to times of the first successful commercial oil site in the US in Oil Creek, Pennsylvania.

Toyota Mirai runs on hydrogen, which combined with oxygen is used to produce electric energy in fuel cells. The main topic of the presentation is that hydrogen can be produced from everything, even from water from Oil Creek – but you have to provide all the energy for the electrolysis, and then you get only part of it back to power electric motor.

In Toyota’s earlier episode “Fueled by Bullsh*t” Toyota confused us a little bit, but at the end of the day we will always be skeptical and wonder how you can produce, deliver and store hydrogen economically, including expensive fuel cells, which needs “a drastic technological evolution“?

Category: Toyota


37 responses to "Toyota Mirai Advertisement – Fueled By Oil Creek? – Video"
  1. jon says:

    Is it just me or does touting the Mirai as the evolution of transportation by using water from the birthplace of the oil industry to power it just highlight the relationship between hydrogen, toyota, and big oil. If it were up to me I would do everything I can to distance the Mirai from the big oil supplied fracked natural gas reformed into hydrogen that we all know is the only economical way to power that car.

  2. Djoni says:

    “Economical” is a way of saying that hasn’t been proven yet.

  3. mrenergyczar says:

    There is great interest to keep people tethered to a fueling station beyond gasoline, regardless if you will always drive further per dollar of electric in a plug-in…..

  4. Djoni says:

    If you just plug in the electricity used for doing this film in a BEV, it would have gone lot farther than you would have with a full tank of hydrogen and without all the energy wasted to break the molecule, compress, carry and push it into the tanks of this joke.

  5. Alaa says:

    How can an old man like him fool this kids knowingly! The energy you put in the splitting of one molecule of H2O is more than 2 electron volts. Much more.
    Also Hydrogen is the smallest atom we know. It is impossible to make a valve for it. The valve will leak.

  6. Scott Franco, the greedy republican says:

    The new Toyota Mirai: change from outdated fossil fueled car to a … nuther fossil fueled car. Its totally clean*. Its new. Its shiny. Buy one, or not. We get credits from the government either way.

    * Sorta. Kinda. If you don’t look real close.

  7. Alex says:

    Whether Toyota will survive the BEV revolution ?! I heard they are working on a BEV with Mazda, so maybe they noticed that FCV has no chance next 10 – 15 years.
    Especially Tesla will f*** Toyota Mirai with free supercharger network.

    1. sven says:

      Yep. Toyota and Mazda are reportedly working on a i3-sized BEV for the American market with a 124 mile or greater electric driving range, and base price of approximately $23,000. Things sure are getting interesting in the BEV market!

      “Additionally, the two companies will team up to design a BMW i3-sized EV that will boast a total driving range of at least 124 miles. Developed largely with the United States market in mind, the electric twins will carry a base price of approximately $23,000, a figure that will make them considerably less expensive than the more capable Chevrolet Bolt.”

      1. JakeY says:

        I take that as hedging their bets for the ZEV requirement. They are heavily stepping up their marketing for the Mirai, but it’s not a given that it will sell in enough volume to satisfy their ZEV requirements. Since Mazda also needs something to satisfy their ZEV requirement a joint development would be a win-win for both.

        Also, China is adamant that EVs are the answer and hydrogen isn’t (a point Toyota brought up before I believe), so I wonder if Toyota will carry over an EV from that market.

        1. sven says:

          Mazda is no longer required to sell a ZEV in CARB states. A couple of days ago CARB changed (gutted) the rules that require intermediate-volume automakers like Mazda to produce ZEVs in order to sell vehicles in CARB states. Instead of requiring intermediate-volume automakers to produce BEVs or hydrogen FCVs, CARB will now allow those companies to produce Transitional Zero-Emission Vehicles (TZEVs) instead. A TZEV is basically a 20 mile PHEV.

          TZEV definition on page 5:

  8. Scott says:

    What’s Toyota’s game here? I’m really just waiting for some PR coming out saying that this has just been a long running April Fools joke. Is there really enough government $$ available for them to soak up, to make this worthwhile?

    1. pjwood1 says:

      I’m confused about who they’re marketing too, not why they’re getting behind a non-starter (check hybrid market share protection, for that). The ad almost tries to create a clean debate, among the clean car owners.

      Fossil electricity – EV
      Fossil electricity – Fuel Cell (EV)

      See how simple that was? If only life were so simple.

    2. Lensman says:

      Toyota (and Honda and Hydundai) are not the originators of this insane and counter-productive promotion of a dead-end tech. And let’s keep in mind that Toyota and Honda are Japanese companies, not American. Don’t blame the automobile manufacturers; they’re just pawns in this game.

      In the USA, it’s the California Fuel Cell Partnership which has been the big leader in pushing the State of California to promote use of “fool cell” cars, by granting a lot of carbon credits for every FCV sold. Now if we look at the list of what companies are part of that partnership, we see Chevron and Shell included on that list.

      The government of Japan is pushing the “hydrogen highway” even harder. If you look at the list of oil & natural gas companies in Japan who are promoting the hydrogen highway project, the list is much longer. Here is a partial list:

      JX Nippon Oil & Energy Corporation
      Osaka Gas Company
      Cosmo Oil Company
      Saibu Gas Company
      Showa Shell Sekiyu K.K.
      Tokyo Gas Company
      Toho Gas Company

      So, why would oil & gas companies push “fool cell” cars? Two reasons:

      1. They know it’s a dead-end tech, and that any money, time, and effort sunk into developing that will be diverted from development of practical “alternative fuel” vehicles such as EVs.

      2. 95% of commercially produce hydrogen fuel is made from natural gas, so even if the scientifically and economically impossible happens and somehow hydrogen fuel can be made cost-competitive, the companies selling natural gas benefit.

      Bottom line: It appears that Big Oil & Gas are responsible for promoting this dead-end, faux “green” tech. For them, it’s a can’t-lose prospect. Sure, eventually people will realize what a waste of money and time it is, but in the meantime Big Oil & Gas can use the promotion of “fool cell” vehicles to slow the EV revolution. So those companies have every reason to lobby governments to promote the use of FCVs.

      I’m not one for conspiracy theories, but this isn’t really a conspiracy; it’s not hidden at all. If you ask “cui bono?” (“who benefits?”), the answer is right there out in the open.

      1. Three Electrics says:

        The number of gas stations with Chevron and Shell logos on them in the U.S. is staggering. In fact they operate several H2 stations in CA. If the goal is to replace gas pumps, these are the stakeholders you want. They are diversified evergy production and distribution companies and some of the only organizations with the capability to build hydrogen distribution infrastructure on top of their existing pipeline networks.

        1. Lensman says:

          Your post reads like you own stock in a Big Oil company. Remember, these companies are the enemy of the EV revolution. They are the pushers of the world’s addiction to burning ~80 million barrels of oil each and every single day.

          I don’t want Big Oil companies to transition to selling a different form of fossil fuel, especially not commercially produced hydrogen, which has even worse well-to-wheel carbon emissions than gasoline. I want the Big Oil companies to shrivel and die, and to do so quickly.

      2. no comment says:

        for your information GM is also engaged in FCEV development and is reportedly planning to introduce an FCEV within the next few years.

    3. Speculawyer says:

      Try to stall the plug-in market with FUD while selling lots of conventional hybrids.

  9. EVer says:

    And look at those Cows, they look harmless, but when killed are even more pollutant than cars

    Another problem that needs to be solved

    1. Mikael says:

      It’s the other way around. When the cows are alive they are more pollutant than cars (well, only in CO2 eqvivalents, not so much SOx and NOx etc. 😉 ).
      So a mass slaughter of cows or even a full scale holocaust would be helpful…. but personally I prefered to go electric instead. 😛

  10. Lensman says:

    Given that Chevron and Shell Hydrogen are two of the companies involved in the California Fuel Cell Partnership, it doesn’t surprise me at all to see oil included on an English language promotion for “fool cell” vehicles. I don’t know if Big Oil & Gas are actually funding Toyota and Honda and Hyundai to develop FCVs (Fuel Cell Vehicles), but certainly they’re helping pay to promote the use of them.

    Japan is pushing the idea of the “hydrogen highway” even harder than California is. Not surprisingly, the list of companies promoting that contains a much longer list of companies selling natural gas.

    1. Mister G says:

      Nailed it.

  11. Anon says:

    Would absolutely kill (pun intended) to see test footage of what exactly happens when a 10,000 psi Mirai Fuel Tank (or both!)crammed full of Hydrogen, structurally fails– spontaneously.

    You just know there HAS TO BE video of this, somewhere in Toyota’s R&D Archives.

    1. I haven’t seen video of a 10,000 PSI hydrogen tank failing, but I have seen video of what happens when a 3,600 PSI compressed natural gas tank explodes. Bad things happen to nearby buildings.

      Lots of videos about it on YouTube.

      1. Lensman says:

        10,000 PSI wouldn’t matter much if the tank was the size of a thimble.

        The question which should be asked is this: Just how much chemical energy does the tank hold? I remember reading a post on the subject of the supposed dangers of an exploding FCV tank which made me laugh out loud; it asked whether such an explosion would take out 100 city blocks or merely 10!

        Let’s recall that a typical FCV’s hydrogen tank contains less energy than a typical gas guzzler car’s gasoline tank. Those hoping for destruction on the scale of the Hindenburg are going to be sadly disappointed, even in the unlikely event that the escaping hydrogen catches fire.

        1. Anon says:

          1. The two Mirai tanks are NOT the size of thimbles. They are designed to carry up to 5 killograms of compressed hydrogen onboard.

          2. Once you get up to tens of 1000’s of psi; what is in the tank becomes less important than the pressure it contains when it suddenly gets released in an “unscheduled dis-assembly”. The tank itself, becomes the bomb. The fact that they’re also carrying Hydrogen, is just icing on the cake.

          3. Did you NOT watch the 3600 psi cng tank explosion video, that ECI linked? The Toyota FCV uses more than twice the psi in its tank design…

          1. K-lein says:

            I watched the video, I can clearly see the explosion is coming from inside the building.

            I can’t see any gas tank anywhere. It all blows up instantly, and there is no fire-ball, meaning the gas was already mixed with oxygen before the explosion started.
            The most likely scenario for this video is a gas pipe leak in the building, not an exploding gas tank.

            1. Scrub through the video frame by frame and the fireball is quite evident. The van was blown into the alley and on its side.

              I don’t know anything more about this particular video, but it is a very good representation of the destructive power. As I said, there are dozens, probably hundreds of examples online. Some occurring at refueling stations, others on the freeway. No building or gas pipes nearby. Unless you’re going to deny the destructive power of natural gas at 3,600 PSI, it’s a bit of a moot point.

            2. I stand corrected K-lein. The garage door on the building does appear to bulge slightly just before the fireball. Not that that makes me feel any better about having a tank, valves and fuel lines containing flammable gas in my garage but when I’m wrong I’ll admit it. You are right. The explosion originates from the garage.

              Here’s another one instead. It appears that the gas leaked into the trunk. The tank is probably intact or the destruction would have been much greater.


  12. Stephen Hodges says:

    As Lucy would say…. bleeeeegh!

  13. no comment says:

    i think that some here have “lost the plot” here a bit as to what the regulatory objective behind all of this is: namely to produce zero emission automobiles. whether that is achieve by BEV or FCEV seems most relevant to the conspiracy theorists and elon musk fanboys.

    i personally see the potential for a coexistence between BEV and FCEV but both technologies will have to become more economically viable. i can possibly see the PHEV relegating the BEV to niche status but the quick refill feature of FCEV makes it too compelling of a technology to ignore. i suppose that is why honda and hyundai are committing to FCEV.

    1. Lensman says:

      Well, science isn’t for everyone.

    2. Ambulator says:

      Home charging is more compelling than fast refills for me.

    3. Nick says:

      I worry mostly that FCEVs are being used as an excuse to do nothing.

      The argument I dislike is: Just give us more time, and we’ll make awesome future cars which don’t pollute! In the mean time, we’ll crank out SUVs as fast as we can sell them.

      EVs are ready now. We should be switching now.

  14. JR says:

    Oil money or not!
    I still fail to see FCEV is the way to go with cars, you just keeping the existing distribution infrastructure, BEV is much more easy in daily use and more safe. and Tesla has proven that long travel is not an issue.

    I do see a future in house having fuel cells and a big Hydrogen tanks instead of oil tanks
    you have battery to take the short term during the night and a Hydrogen tank and a fuel cell to take you though the winter, and all the Hydrogen can be made by the solar cells on your roof
    All you need is to get the price down
    If you what to go off grid this is the way to do it

  15. Anderlan says:

    WHEN I can drive 15,000 miles per year for 20 years by spending $15,000 on hardware at my house, THEN THE FRACKOGEN FOOL CELL FOLKS can call me and tell me that EVs (and PV and batteries) aren’t way better.

    miles/year: 15000
    mi/kwhr: 4
    Annual kwhr per kw of PV: conservatively 1000 (actual US range: 900-1600)

    PV Required to drive (kw): 3.75
    Battery Required (kwhr): 10.27
    Total cost: $15,000 installed, with inverter.