Toyota Mirai Capable Of Covering 1,438-Miles In 24-Hour Run

SEP 19 2016 BY MARK KANE 155

Hydrogen fuel station – FirstElement Fuel’s True Zero Hydrogen Network

Hydrogen fuel station – FirstElement Fuel’s True Zero Hydrogen Network

The founders of True Zero hydrogen station network recently spent some time with Toyota Mirai, covering 1,438 miles (2,313 km) in a 24-hour period.

That’s a lot, as the Toyota Mirai was capable to go 300 miles after every refuel.

“The goal of the drive was to demonstrate how a zero-emission electric vehicle can serve as a replacement for a gasoline vehicle.  The car was refueled with four-minute “fill ups” using the True Zero retail hydrogen network between southern and northern California.  The mileage mark is expected to become an official record once documentation is submitted and reviewed.

The drive, which started in Long Beach, spanned from sea level to 7200 feet, passed through six of the seven largest cities in California, and crossed the state’s boundary into Reno. True Zero’s hydrogen charging stations in Long Beach, Harris Ranch/Coalinga, Truckee, Mill Valley, Saratoga and Santa Barbara were used to refuel the cars during the drive, as was a hydrogen charger in Sacramento operated by Linde.”

According to press release, the new FCV record “unofficially” broken the existing Guinness World Record for electric car miles driven  – 0ver 1,331 miles (2142.317 km).

Well, we do appreciate the achievement, but at the same time we kinda feel like this was an opportunistic way to play the Mirai off in the one area it can still best a plug-in electric vehicle – distance over a limited/set period of time (…especially now as the Tesla Model S P100D can travel further than the Mirai’s 300 miles), while also using the feat to tout it as an “electric car”.

Both statements are true in a technical sense of course, but maybe still a bit off-putting at the same time, as it pushes the boundaries of “truth in advertising” as well.

Toyota Mirai

Toyota Mirai

As of today there is 15 True Zero’s hydrogen stations operational and 4 more are expected to be operational by the end of this year.

Joel Ewanick, Chief Executive Officer of First Element Fuel, True Zero’s parent company said:

“The point has been made that an electric car can do everything that a gasoline car can do, but with zero emissions. All it took was grabbing a credit card, hopping in our Toyota Mirai with its carpool sticker, and charging up at the True Zero hydrogen stations that are open throughout California.  And it’s possible today thanks to the State of California – the vision of the Energy Commission and Air Resources Board has arrived!

We did some city driving, we drove through the mountains, we stopped to take photos, we crossed the golden gate bridge, we stopped to talk to reporters, and we even crossed into Reno.  The Mirai can go more than 300 all-electric miles on each four-minute charge of True Zero hydrogen, so it was easy to do all of it in 24 hours without any concerns or range anxiety.”

“It’s very cool that we were able to show this kind of accomplishment during National Drive Electric Week, he added. “Electric cars are so important to California’s environmental goals and we’re starting to see the momentum build with fuel cells as part of that electric car mix. In just the last six months our True Zero hydrogen chargers have powered well over a million miles of all-electric driving.”

Categories: Toyota

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

155 Comments on "Toyota Mirai Capable Of Covering 1,438-Miles In 24-Hour Run"

newest oldest most voted

…Unless you want to leave California.

There is one station in Tahoe. I expect one in Vegas relatively soon.

To put things into perspective, if the Mirai and the Model S/X both took a trip from San Diego to the Gigafactory in Reno, NV and back to San Diego (approximately 1,120 miles) with speeds limited to a maximum of 10 mph over the speed limit, the Mirai would complete the trip faster than the Model X/S even if it used battery swapping at the Harris Ranch Supercharger station. The Mirai would even be starting out with less than a full tank, since the nearest H2 station is in San Juan Capistrano.

Actually that would be Sparks, Nevada, not Reno.

“nearest H2 station is in San Juan Capistrano”

There lies the first problem. If I wanted the inconvenience of driving to filling stations, I’d get a gas car. If it has a plug with decent range (about 100 miles), it might be a different story, but that doesn’t seem likely.

Then the second problem is (or will be) the cost of filling. So far, it seems that will be at best equal gasoline, but more likely far more expensive. Again, I’d get a gas car.

But for everyone else, I wish they get any kind of EV, FCEV or BEV. There are lot of stinking gas cars on the road, and it seems to be getting worse (or maybe I’m just getting more sensitive to the fumes)

We are just becoming unaccustomed to the smells of the ICEmobiles. I get in my old gasser and can smell the unburned gas in the exhaust when we load up with it running… the other cars in traffic… never used to bother me… sure is noticeable now. They stink.

“There lies the first problem. If I wanted the inconvenience of driving to filling stations, I’d get a gas car. If it has a plug with decent range (about 100 miles), it might be a different story, but that doesn’t seem likely.”

MB promised to release CLK fuel cell plugin next year. I guess 30 miles range is too short for you, but it is current battery technology limitation really – bigger battery would take too much space, weight and cost.

“Then the second problem is (or will be) the cost of filling. So far, it seems that will be at best equal gasoline, but more likely far more expensive. Again, I’d get a gas car.”

Yes, so far it is expensive at pump, but it is being done for future and price at pump is expected to drop closer to feedstock cost. Fuel cells are just more efficient and cleaner/less noisy than ICE, while being able to provide all the properties of ICE across full scale of transportation, not just commuting locally, as this promotional trip illustrates.

30 miles is too short; that will require regular trips to charger (or H station); might as well get a gas car or Volt. 100 miles (or 82 miles per EPA) would avoid almost all extra trips to the charger. “bigger battery would take too much space, weight and cost.” Or one could argue it’s due to FC stuff taking so much space, weight, cost. Seeing how SparkEV does about 100 miles with 490 lb of well managed batteries, FC taking up so much space in Mirai, weight, and cost need much improvement. “price at pump is expected to drop closer to feedstock cost” If you take nat gas reformation in mass scale, price could be pretty cheap, probably only bit higher than gasoline when used in 50%-60% efficient FC. But you argue below that H will come from electrolysis, and that just won’t be cheap. At best, it will be 2X gasoline. Here’s the estimate. electrolysis and filtering: 2X electricity. compression: 15-20% distribution and/or capital cost: 10%-20% when it’s as widespread as gasoline. That’s only with relation to gas cars. Compared to BEV that’s 80% or more efficient, FC is only 50% efficient, making it much, much worse. Still,… Read more »

To put things in REAL, not your convoluted perspective –

Imagine a gas car starting a promotional journey to garner attention to gas stations by a company that builds them. But say there were only 15 gas stations altogether, in 2 states. The next day, dutiful journalists recorded that blessed event, touting a 24 hour journey superior in every way to horse buggies AND EVEN steam trains!

Now THAT is what you should think about. Your attempts at smearing Tesla are so bizarre and desperate as to actually compare Tesla’s hundreds upon hundreds of Supercharger locations each with multiple charging stations per location – TO FIFTEEN EXPENSIVE AND INCREDIBLY RARE HYDROGEN FUELING STATIONS.

Sven – Go buy a Mirai man – and good luck with that!

Those people with horses and buggies could travel anywhere they wished at any time. Hay and oats are plentiful and abundant. 15 gas stations means that gasoline car was tethered to a very small “track” around those very scant fueling stops.

James,

It’s always nice to hear from you, but are you off your meds again? 😉 I did not in any way “smear Tesla” in my comment above. Perhaps, you’re just wound a little too tight. It’s time to get out of the bitter barn and turn that frown upside down! 😀

And for the record, there are currently 21 retail hydrogen stations in California, with another 5 to 6 scheduled to opened by the end of the year. All 21 retail hydrogen stations are in service and fully functional today. There a also 6 of the older research (non-retail) hydrogen stations still open, but their reliability is hit or miss. Next year these 6 research stations are scheduled to be upgraded to retail hydrogen stations, and more than a dozen new retail hydrogen stations are scheduled to be built.

Here’s a mobile website for your smartphone to check on the status of California’s hydrogen stations. Enjoy! 😀

http://m.cafcp.org/

To quote you directly —-“if the Mirai and the Model S/X both took a trip from San Diego to the Gigafactory in Reno, NV and back to San Diego (approximately 1,120 miles) with speeds limited to a maximum of 10 mph over the speed limit, the Mirai would complete the trip faster than the Model X/S even if it used battery swapping at the Harris Ranch Supercharger station. The Mirai would even be starting out with less than a full tank, since the nearest H2 station is in San Juan Capistrano.”——

How is that NOT a dig on Tesla?!

Point is, Sven – There are so many angles one could take to frame their observations. ONLY YOU would choose to state the Mirai is more efficient than a Model S/X!

Fool Cell Vehicles are not only uber-limited, they’re overpriced and far over-hyped. Generally, this hype comes from OIL COMPANIES and CAR COMPANIES that don’t make a mid-to-long distance EV. Ever in the “not-too-distant future”, and always 10-20 years out…Hmmm….

Only a few years back – if your conventional legacy car company was not at the very minimum, developing some sort of PHEV and/or BEV behind the scenes, you were considered as not taking the American and European environmental and efficiency requirements serious enough.

Today, when you hype, promote, show and even market an EXTREMELY limited run of very expensive to build, high loss FCV cars you are seen as literally MOCKING the government mandates such as C.A.F.E. and C.A.R.B.. As a matter of fact, it’s a travesty when Toyota, Hyundai and others promote their FCVs as “the future” of anything – other than ploys to gather ZEV credits.

Thanks James, for turning my sven-induced frown upside down 🙂

Saying/implying that the Mirai can refuel faster than a Tesla can supercharge/battery-swap on a particular trip is NOT “smearing” Tesla, just like saying a Model S/X Supercharges faster than a Bolt or Leaf is not “smearing” Chevy or Nissan. It’s a fact. Every tech has its strength and weaknesses. Tesla and their fans have got to put on their “big boy pants” and not get so easily offended when someone speak about one of their weaknesses.

James said:
“ONLY YOU would choose to state the Mirai is more efficient than a Model S/X!”

Huh? Reading comprehension is not our strong suit. I never said the Mirai is “more efficient” than a Model S/X, I only said/implied that it would take less time to fuel a Mirai than to charge and battery swap a Model S/X on a round trip from San Diego, CA to Sparks, NV. You’re making stuff up. Why? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

And how do you know how much it costs Toyota to make a Mirai? Do you have a source or is it just a WAG? I think it’s the latter.

Sven – Are you on drugs my good man?!

Since when is time not a specificationn of efficiency? You do know corporations spend huge dollars hiring efficiency experts to consult re: the honing of their operations
to save time doing what they already do, albeit much more efficiently.

Time is money, old boy! Always has been. You are showing a lot of leg in your fight to be right. Sadly your legs are hairy and flabby and nobody’s buying.

It sounds like you’re reaching to me.

To put things on a *NEW* perspective, many people think the Mirai is a *Sh%tty* car, and this story just proves it more:

http://qz.com/785654/toyota-is-using-sewage-sludge-to-power-its-new-electric-car/

Using sewage sludge to make hydrogen, might be practicle from the production side, but still has the same challenges for compression, storage, and final delivery!

They circled the filling station for 24 hrs non stop…

LOL. CARB Bribed by Big Oil Screws Up Again.

Isn’t this the second InsideEVs article on exactly the same thing?

Driving in a loop (even a big loop) around a few H2 fueling stations for 24 hours is as pointless as…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jh9TtmrNskM

Well no, I take that back. Exercising a horse is actually a productive activity, unlike wasting hydrogen fuel on an utterly pointless “fool cell” car demo. That fuel is already ridiculously wasteful of energy, even more so than gasoline or diesel; why highlight the inefficiency by making it even more wasteful than driving one usually is?

🙁

Comes with astronaut underwear

The fun thing is, that the Tesla driver didn’t spend anything on fuel/electricity. The Mirai driver had to buy expensive hydrogen.

I believe that 3 years of hydrogen is included in the Mirai price.

http://www.edmunds.com/toyota/mirai/2016/long-term-road-test/2016-toyota-mirai-hydrogen-is-ridiculously-expensive-or-free.html

The green car revolution brought to you by Exon and Toyota for an always dirty future…

Yes, Toyota guarantees three years of free fuel for the “fool cell” price.

Toyota does that not by choice, but by necessity, since would-be customers would scream with outrage when they found out that H2, at a non-subsidized price, is about $14-15 per kilogram.

Of course, the “fool cell” fanboys keep insisting that somehow the price of H2 will magically drop, despite the fact that basic physics and economics (EROI, or Energy Return On Investment) mandate a price much higher than gasoline for the same energy content.

Funny how the “fool cell” fanboys always ignore the fact that they’d have to magically change the physical properties of an element like hydrogen, in order to make it a more practical and affordable fuel… 😉

Yeah, these guys circled a supercharger on the Autobahn. The Tesla’s slower charging is offset by higher speeds than are legal in California. Fortunately there will soon be 400 hydrogen stations in Germany.

“Soon” “Just around the corner” “in the next few years” “in the near future” “next generation”…. These are all things that will continue to describe fuel cell cars.

Yep.. fuel cells are just too complex… BEVs are going to supplant them before they get established. Installing them for powering homes and possibly buses and large trucks might make sense. But for passenger cars the complexity of the fueling stations and the increasing speeds of charging for electrics look like they will keep fuel cells from really taking off as BEVs seem ready to do.

You nailed it jello, +1!
It should be called a “hype-rogen fool-cell.”

cf. The 12-year-old book, “The Hype about Hydrogen…

Is that the same as “soon there will be infrastructure that will make BEVs viable for people who can’t charge at home”?

The difference is that the infrastructure that will allow people to charge without having their own home charger will actually exist in most places very soon (if it’s not already there now). Nationwide FC refueling won’t.

In your own words:

“Soon” “Just around the corner” “in the next few years” “in the near future” “next generation”

LOL! 😀

You can go from Norway to Italy across Europe right now using existing retail hydrogen stations. Hyundai had done promotional trip, including sustained Autobahn speeds and 5 minute refueling.
Sure it is not available in every place in the woods in the world, but somebody needs to be first.

Four Electrics shilled for the “hydrogen economy”:

“…there will soon be 400 hydrogen stations in Germany.”

Riiiight… just like “fool cell” fanboys keep telling us there will be dozens of H2 fueling stations open to the general public in California “by the end of the year”. But for some strange reason, they keep changing what year that is…

Hydrogen is the fuel of the future… and always will be!

And they used the P85D. If there is ever a 100D released they could drive 15% faster* and take the same route again.

They where 20 hours driving, 4 hours charging. If the supercharger charge rate would increase also by 32% they could travel up to 1730 miles in one day the next time… 😀 Cool.

*15% faster driving takes around 32% more energy

To be fair, from the pic above there were two Miria’s and it looks like the first Mirai waited for the second Mirai to fill up before proceeding further. So the Mirai could have gone further in 24 hours if it was traveling alone.

1506 miles in 24 h with a Model S P85D, now that is even more impressive because it can only be better with the new Model S100D and still more with the coming Model S 100D.
I see a record of 2000 miles in 24 h within reach very soon.

A german Tesla driver (Horst Luening) did 2424km in 24h (you can watch it on youtube) @ zero costs. I want to know what that hydrogen cost, they won’t give away that shit for free so… Yes I know that the Tesla is an expensive car, but so is the Mirai.

The Toyota Website states the price of the Mirai includes “complimentary fuel for three years or $15,000 maximum, whichever comes first.”

That’s about 60,000 miles worth of free H2 at today’s prices. What happens after that?

What happens after that? Following three years of howling protests from the electorate, overriding the carmaker lobbyists, CARB shuts down the ridiculous credit structure that vastly favors hydrogen, and Toyota immediately shuts down the fuel cell program.

It’s all about politics and profit.

I sure miss Stephen Chu.

Since leaving office, Stephen Chu has flip-flopped his stance on hydrogen.

Sadly for “fool cell” fanboys, the Laws of Physics are unlikely to do a similar flip-flop.

Mirai or Tucson is some $500/mo plus ~$3k downpayment, or around $600/mo with 0 downpayment. Free fuel included, and I would think free maintenance included too as with other Toyota cars. Honda Clarity that is about to go for sale in California likely to have similar price tag, and new 2018 Hyundai model should be cheaper and have longer range.

“broken the existing Guinness World Record for electric car miles driven”
———–

If using hydrogen counts as electric miles, then why not using a gasoline generator? Take an i3 or Fisker Karma across the country.

Those cars wouldn’t break the record, since the Mirai requires fewer refuelings due to a larger tank, and each refueling is as quick as an ICE car, if not quicker.

A chevy volt certainly would break it, while being much cheaper to buy.

@ Four Electrics – the Karma has a 300 mile range and you can fill a gas tank faster than a hydrogen tank (I don’t care what Toyota claims).

@ John Mirolha – I refrained from suggesting the Volt because someone would point out that it is possible to drive the wheels directly from the ICE, thus not a series (EV) connection.

According to Wikipedia, the Karma has only 230 miles of range when fully fueled and charged. Without a full charge it would be less, and it charges slowly.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisker_Karma#Fuel_economy_and_range

I had forgotten that the Karma gets only 20 MPGe in range extender mode. That atrocious! Many SUVs have hiher MPG ratings than that.

http://fueleconomy.gov/m/m.do?action=vehicles&id=32516

Also could use a BMW i8, which can go over 300 miles on gasoline.

Faster refueling than an ICE? Really? Where do you get that from?

Yeah, by what I understand most hydrogen fill-ups are slower. A gas fill-up is like 5 minutes but a hydrogen fill-up is closer to 10 minutes. But that still is much faster than even a Supercharger, so hydrogen does have a faster refuel than EVs. I just don’t think that matters much.

There is still a problem though, the Hydrogen fill up time is pretty much the best they can do. For batteries we are still nowhere close to the best we can do. Superchargers are currently working at low voltage and have a power limited to 135 KW but Porsche is working with 800 V and a Protera bus can charge at up to 1400 KW.
So we see that on the electric charging speed there is, at contrary, a very large potential for further improvement.
Soon we will get to 350 KW or 500 KW and that will already allow charging speeds similar to hydrogen.
Next we will go at 1 MW and perhaps even beyond at 12 MW which will allow charging in 30 seconds, which is faster than gas filling.
Be ready for big surprises that will set the ev image of slow charging completely upside down.

Some are already testing 30 second recharge on batteries.
Here is a link to one lab doing just that:

http://www.wired.co.uk/article/storedot-molecules-will-change-technology

@kdawg
“If using hydrogen counts as electric miles, then why not using a gasoline generator? ”

I have something to say about H2 powered vehicles:

-It’s all a plot by big oil

-It’s more efficient to just put the renewable energy into a battery

-It’s all just made from fracked natural gas

Oh wait that’s been said a million times already

“never mind ”
-Emily Latella

or was it Art Vandale?

Yeah, I don’t know how many times it has to be explained that hydrogen fuel cells for passenger vehicles just doesn’t make sense. Not that it’s needed, but it Would be great for a significant battery breakthrough to occur, just to put the hydrogen case to bed.

this sounds like one of those crazy; “who killed the ev1?”; conspiracy theories.

an fcev is emissions free, a gasoline generator in a phev is not. that’s the main difference. the incentive to develop fcev’s is because they provide emissions free electric driving with a refill time that is comparable to that of an icev (where “icev” means “internal combustion engine vehicle” and in no way connotes an electric vehicle).

the point of all of this is to produce an emissions free electric vehicle that will appeal to the general public and not just to ev enthusiasts.

Not just @Kdawg here:

Do none of you realize that you’re in large part just arguing over how big a gas tank these PHEVs have?

Regarding EV range, your discussion is entirely pointless… other than underscoring just why it’s important, when talking about PHEV mileage and range, to account for electric-powered miles and gas-powered miles separately.

Entirely separately, to avoid the very sort of confusion your discussion represents.

The real news here is that Toyota sold 371 Mirais in the US last month: http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20160901005940/en/Toyota-Motor-Sales-Reports-August-2016-Sales

Time to add the Mirai to the sales tracker! It is an EV, after all.

“It is an EV, after all.”

Do we really have to do this ?? You know it ain’t and just because the big oils pay you to say so doesn’t make it electric.

Do you put electricity in it ? No ? Not an EV…
Prius isn’t an EV even though it can be moved with electric motor.

The hydrogen in a FCV is an energy carrier, while the gasoline in a Prius is fuel.

And what’s the difference between “energy carrier” and “fuel”?

You are both right . . . a fuel is literally an “energy carrier”.

But the point he is trying to make is that hydrogen is never the original energy source. There are no hydrogen mines or hydrogen wells. Hydrogen is synthesized by either steam-reforming methane (which makes up 98% of commercial hydrogen) or electrolysis of water (which is just a tiny amount of extra pure hydrogen).

So a fuel cell car is generally a natural gas car but they don’t like to say that.

By the same token, there are no gasoline mines or gasoline wells.

Gasoline is the product of refining oil to remove unwanted components, which is exactly what you do to methane or water to “refine” hydrogen.

Well, this becomes a semantics issues. Much of the base chemicals of gasoline (such as octane) are present in crude oil and they just need to be separated out.

With hydrogen, there is no base free hydrogen in methane or water . . . the hydrogen is chemically bonded to another element (carbon and oxygen, respectively). So you have to break those chemical bonds by inputting more energy to get free hydrogen (H2). Although the two situations with hydrogen are very different. It takes a lot of energy to break the hydrogen out of water whereas it doesn’t take that much energy to free up the hydrogen out of methane.

Spider-Dan said:

“Gasoline is the product of refining oil to remove unwanted components, which is exactly what you do to methane or water to “refine” hydrogen.”

Quite correct. It’s a false equivalency to claim there is no important difference between H2 from refining fracked natural gas vs. H2 from electrolysis. The energy in the “frackogen” comes from natural gas. Of course, some of that is lost (wasted) in the refining process, but what’s left comes from natural sources; we don’t have to provide it.

Contrariwise, the energy contained in so-called “renewable” H2 from electrolysis all has to be provided by people, using various industrial processes.

But either way, most of the energy contained in the H2 fuel is wasted in several processes it has to go thru after generation (compression, storage, transport, re-compression, dispensing) after being generated. Those energy losses are actually much more significant than the amount of energy used to generate H2 by electrolysis, which is why H2 — either frackogen or so-called “renewable” hydrogen — is even worse for the environment, on a well-to-wheel energy efficiency basis, and on a pollution generated basis, than gasoline or diesel.

California allows up to 70% non renewable hydrogen fuel sources, to match battery cars charged from California grid. In practice it is still over 40% renewable in California.

Other countries have government mandates to use 100% renewable hydrogen fuel, much better than typical electric grid.

Hydrogen for fertilizer production or as used at oil refineries has little to do with what is sold at the pump as higher purity hydrogen fuel.

So, you’re claiming that frackogen, when used as a fuel for “fool cell” cars, has to go through a second refining step, making it even more wasteful of energy than normal frackogen.

I don’t know if that’s true or not, but it certainly isn’t helping your repeated claims that you can magically change the physical properties of the element hydrogen to make it into a practical and affordable fuel.

speculawyer said:
“There are no hydrogen mines or hydrogen wells.”

But hydrogen could be farmed from algae in the future. Scientists are genetically engineering algae to hyper-produce pure hydrogen from photosynthesis, and have already engineered a way to boost hydrogen production nearly five-fold from single-celled green algae. The National Renewable Energy Lab in Colorado thinks hydrogen can be made from bio-engineered algae for around $3 per kilo.

http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/science/1.741421

I am sure hydrogen will make a great fuel for the Mars colunists from alge in the FUTURE…

Here on earth in the real world of today and tomorrow Exon Chevron big coal along with the rest of the oil and gas industry thank you for for your support in contributing to global warming and their bank accounts…

sven said:

“The National Renewable Energy Lab in Colorado thinks hydrogen can be made from bio-engineered algae for around $3 per kilo.”

…after which it will — just like H2 from any other source — have to be compressed, stored, transported, re-compressed, and dispensed using extremely expensive, low-volume, energy-wasting equipment, and will still wind up costing about $14-15 per kg when actually dispensed into a “fool cell” car.

You do know that Toyota is selling Mirais to the State of California for $41k, right?

The insideevs statstics only include cars with a plug. Anyways the high number of mirais was mentioned there in the text…

Wonder how long it will take before Mirai will beat the record from east to west cost that Tesla have right now?

Probably not for some time if ever, due to no hydrogen stations.

Would have a better chance with a CNG fuel cell. At least there’s already a CNG “superhighway”.

How much did each of those fill-ups cost?

Or should I say, how much was the bill to Toyota for each of those fill-ups?

Well, let’s see, $15,000 or three years of free fuel so $15,000/(365*3)=$13.70 a day for about 40 miles per day on average. They drove 1331 miles so that is $13.70*1331/40=$456

Holy s–t. I spend $17 for an entire MONTH on electricity for my car. That’s driving every day at least 20 miles.

That is an excellent point because no one really knows. For now, the fill-ups are built into the lease of the vehicle. And if they were to pay standard market prices, I think it is more expensive than gasoline on a per mile basis. However, people claim that the price will come down when mass manufacturing scale is reached.

But who knows what is real. Anyone know?

Average wind electricity PPA in the mid US last year was 2-2.5 cnt/kWH. Typical electrolizer produces 1 kg of hydrogen per 50 kWh, plus oxygen that can be sold too. So you have around $1/kg feedstock cost. Low volume deliveries by truck in compressed form to requested destination are some $8/kg, liquid form as used by Linde stations a bit more, maybe $10/kg. Once you reach higher volumes most of these low volume deliveries can be switched to pipelines or local production and potentially can go below gasoline price. Bus stations that have their own hydrogen production are close to cost parity with diesel fuel costs right now when accounted for higher FC efficiency.
http://www.cantonrep.com/news/20160825/sarta-readying-hydrogen-pumping-station
“hydrogen, which currently costs about $4.63 a kilogram, for now, provides no fuel savings due to the plunge in oil prices the past year.”

Wind energy???

97 % comes from cracked coal oil and gas….

How about truth in advertising???

zzzzz and the other resident shills for H2/Fool Cells/serial Tesla-haters don’t do truth in advertising, they prefer FUD, bait and switch and other tactics of the established foes of energy and transportation sustainability.

speculawyer asked: “But who knows what is real. Anyone know?” What is real is EROI (Energy Return On Investment). About 67%-80% of the energy (depending on how it’s generated and used) in H2 is wasted by the time it actually powers the motor in a FCEV. That’s not going to change by scaling up the generating process. That means the cost of H2 may come down fractionally, but certainly not to the unrealistically low price of %4-6 per kg which “fool cell” fanboys keep claiming. Another problem is the expensive equipment needed for storing and dispensing compressed H2 gas, including specialize high pressure pumps and special seals. Again, the price of that could come down somewhat if a lot of them are built, altho of course the equipment and the filling stations will never be as cheap and easy to maintain as a gas station, which needs only a very simple pump and storage tanks made of perfectly ordinary mild steel. One doesn’t normally choose the most difficult, most expensive way to tackle a problem… which is what trying to put H2 into widespread use would be. And that is why the cost (and non-subsidized price) of H2 dispensed into… Read more »

I think the 24-hour distance record for hydrogen-powered vehicles is actually 1,480.73 miles, set by a Hyundai ix35 Fuel Cell in Germany.

http://insideevs.com/hyundai-tucson-fcev-drives-1480-miles-in-24-hours/

Mirai can only be driven in CA. Unless you cross the border into NV, then come right back. Lol

Lame.

bring on the 800 Volt superchargers!!

Who cares? They could drive around the Earth on a single fill-up for all I care. FCEVs don’t solve the problems we need to solve. And the problem of course is that they make some people think they CAN solve the problems, thereby delaying proper EVs.

If InsideEVs itself admits that FCEVs are electric vehicles only in a narrow technical sense, but not really, then why give them the benefit of coverage?

FCVs solve the primary problem that BEVs won’t be able to solve anytime soon, which is a petroleum-free option for those who can’t charge at home.

And so would a combination of widespread DCFC and having utility companies install parking lot L1 & L2 chargers at or around apartment complexes since everyone lives in a place that already is served by the much more efficient electricity compared to H2.

This approach however would conflict with the Big Oil companies desires to keep customers captive to a fuel source they completely control and supply.

I will say however, if Big Oil wants to invest THEIR money in building out an H2 supply and distribution infrastructure then I have no problems with H2.

This will never happen though because the costs would bankrupt them.

There is effectively no business model for building out a home charging network. Utility companies are completely uninterested and no one else would be able to make money off of it without raising the prices high enough to kill the demand. (DCFC is irrelevant, as it’s too expensive to replace gasoline.)

Nice try at spinning the issue SD.

Just because most slow-moving electrical utilities have their heads up the asses regarding a business opportunity around PEV charging doesn’t change the fact that they can sell a lot of electricity to apartment dwellers and workplaces as PEVs go mainstream.

DCFC will be more expensive then night-time L1/L2 charging certainly but it has also already started and both will continue to increase as sales of PEVs increase.

It will happen and in fact there are some big utilities already

It’s not even an issue of “heads up their asses”; it’s an issue of it actively being a terrible idea for utilities to get involved.

Unlike gasoline or H2 stations, which can be built on a specific plot of leased/owned land, home charging would need to be built on MANY different plots of land, owned by MANY different entities with disparate priorities. So in a hypothetical scenario where a utility decided to build out home chargers, who would own the chargers? Who would pay for the very expensive trenching needed to install them on surface lots? Who would pay for the substantial apartment complex grid upgrades needed to provide power to dozens (if not hundreds) of EVSEs? Who would be responsible for their maintenance and repair?

There are many obstacles to home charging for all, and most of them don’t even have a solution on the horizon. If we truly want to eliminate petroleum usage, there will need to be another technology to complement BEVs… and FCVs are the best available option to fill that role.

OMG, then how do they ever put in things like lighting, etc.

Those are all artificial “obstacles”. They are easily dealt with pretty much the same way utilities installed electrical service to the facilities to begin with.

The only thing new will be the billing and that can be handled through virtual sub-metering so that the end user pays.

Utility companies don’t install, own, and maintain lighting on private property! That’s the point!

Spider-Dan said: “There is effectively no business model for building out a home charging network. Utility companies are completely uninterested…” That’s just short-term thinking, isn’t it? Just because not a lot of electric utilities are jumping on the bandwagon — yet — doesn’t mean they won’t, as EVs become more popular and more commonplace. There is an economic model which is far more affordable than what is being deployed here in the USA: the EV-Line service in S. Korea. It works even better there than it will here, because 220v is their electrical standard, making L2 charging the default. But I think before long we’ll see something quite similar to that being installed in a growing number of places. Seems to me this really does solve all the big problems: Expensive chargers, inability to pay for charging with an ordinary credit card, and lack of standardization. If utilities start installing this type of charger, this will also put an end to the outrageous overcharging for something as simple as digging a narrow trench so they can bury the power line for the installation. Electric utilities have workers who do that routinely all day long, so they won’t be charging $1000… Read more »

Once again: I’ve yet to see anyone provide a reason why utility companies should be interested in setting up contracts with hundreds (if not thousands) of private entities to build out EVSEs on their property, which the utility would then be responsible for maintaining. The profit motive is extremely questionable, especially since EV tech is still relatively young (if not infancy, then certainly toddlerhood). Who’s to say that J1772 will still be the standard in a decade?

At the end of the day, one can make arguments about how utility companies should be eager to install EVSEs across the nation, but the plain and simple fact is that they are not and have announced no plans to. And if the utility companies – the entities with the single best position to profit from EVSE installations – thinks they are a bad investment, why would anyone else do it in their place?

except it’s not petroleum free and it’s not a real every day solution.

FCVs only solve the problem of how to fraudently present coal oil and gas as a green fuel when it is not…

Terawatt has it right…

Inside Evs please do not propogate the hydrogen green car myth…

So could a car powered by dilithium crystals.. if there were only dilithium crystal fueling stations anywhere besides space dock. Lol!

You can’t find any dilithium crystal refuelling stations because they outlast the car, silly!

Eduardo Pelegri-LLopart

I may have seen that Mirai on the road last week. We were driving on 680 and saw one around Martinez. My first sighting of a Mirai.

I wish toyota would just do a “normal” BEV. I can see the benefit of fuel cells in general, and, maybe, in long distance rigs, but that’s about it, and its a big diversion for them.

Few things could be more stupid – Plus no one cares. These pollute worse than gas cars if you factor in creating and distributing the hydrogen. Plus, high pressure Hydrogen tanks – what could go wrong? These cars are expensive to purchase, fuel, and maintain.

Toyota just does not want to admit the obvious – its time to go to BEV.

Plus which, the last I heard, hydrogen fuel cells only last about 75,000 miles.
Not impressive on any level.

Your information is out of date. The fuel cell stack in the Toyota Mirai is designed to last approximately 150,000 miles. In addition, the Mirai’s fuel cell stack is covered by an 8-year or 100,000 mile warranty, whichever comes first.

“The warranty includes:
8-year or 100,000 mile warranty (whichever comes first) on key fuel cell components including the FC stack and power control unit; FC hydrogen tanks; hybrid battery pack and ECU; FC air compressor, boost converter and ECU; hybrid control module (power management control module); and hydrogen fueling ECU.”

FAQ – After Your Order – Service & Maintenance:
https://ssl.toyota.com/mirai/faq.html

Neither gasmobiles nor PEVs (Plug-in EVs) come with an expiration date — a “do not use after” date!

Too bad about the Mirai — and other “fool cell” cars. Can you imagine what that would do to the resale value… assuming you could find anyone foolish enough to buy one? LOL!

http://insideevs.com/2016-toyota-mirai-refuel-2029/

JC said:
“These pollute worse than gas cars if you factor in creating and distributing the hydrogen.”

That’s absolutely wrong.

The Union of Concerned Scientist calculated that an ICE Hyundai Tuscon powered by gasoline emits has well-to-wheels CO2 emissions of 436 grams/mile, while a Hyundai Tucson FCEV powered by California’s current mix of hydrogen has well-to-wheels CO2 emissions of only 173 grams/mile, 60% less than the gasoline ICE Tuscon.

If the Hyundai Tucson FCEV was powered solely by hydrogen made from steam reformed methane, then it would have well-to-wheels CO2 emissions of only 202 grams/mile, 54% less than the gasoline ICE Tuscon.

http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2014/10/How-Clean-Are-Hydrogen-Fuel-Cells-Fact-Sheet.pdf

That just shows how inefficient the ICE Tuscon is. What we have right now as the state-of-the-art is Mirai vs the Prius. The Prius is 52 MPG combined and the Mirai that gets 67 MPGe, or only 29% better. However, the energy used to make gasoline and hydrogen is different. U.S. refineries are 86% efficient at turning crude oil into useable fuels when considering all the inputs. Electrolysis is less efficient that methane reformation, so I’ll use SMR figures (also, SMR supplies the fast majority of hydrogen in this country and will do so for the foreseeable future) At ~80% efficiency, SMR is already losing out here, but hydrogen compression and distribution also use a lot of energy compared to petrol fuel because of hydrogen’s much lower energy density. Let’s be generous and say the fuel going into a hydrogen vehicle contains 75% of the energy that went into making it. When this is taken into account, the advantage of the Mirai is only 12.4%. And this is with a car that is 2.5x the price of the Prius that also has less interior room and can only be refueled at a few locations in California. And those fueling stations… Read more »

No, it shows how inefficient the gasoline ICE is compared to a hydrogen fuel cell. The above is an apples-to-apples well-to-wheels CO2 comparison of a Tuscon with a gasoline ICE vs. a Tuscon with a hydrogen fuel cell. It’s the well-to-wheels CO2 emissions of the same CUV with two different powertrains, one a gasoline ICE and the other a hydrogen fuel cell.

“That just shows how inefficient the ICE Tuscon is. What we have right now as the state-of-the-art is Mirai vs the Prius. The Prius is 52 MPG combined and the Mirai that gets 67 MPGe, or only 29% better.” Yes, Prius is good, clean and efficient car. Prius Eco 2017 is even 56 mpg combined. It is not battery electric though. And it is quit different from crossover like Tucson. I guess you can seat adults in rear seats in Tucson, not just kids like in regular Prius (not Prius V that has much lower mpg). Fuel cell technology probably is not ready for cars like Prius yet, even if Hyundai promises more efficient model in 2018. Still, nobody pushes or expects everybody just switch to fuel cells cars right now :/ These are low volume cars for early technology testing, not mass scale sale effort. “However, the energy used to make gasoline and hydrogen is different. U.S. refineries are 86% efficient at turning crude oil into useable fuels when considering all the inputs. Electrolysis is less efficient that methane reformation, so I’ll use SMR figures (also, SMR supplies the fast majority of hydrogen in this country and will do… Read more »
john.p.christian@gmail.com

Thats like saying all electricity is generated by Hydro or wind. Just not true. This is a bad idea start to finish and helps no one except big oil and those who refuse to admit the day of burning stuff so that we can move our vehicles down the road is over.

The hydrogen dispensed at California fueling stations is 45% renewable hydrogen for the current year. It is what it is.

PDF page 67, report page 63:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/ab8/ab8_report_2016.pdf

And that is only because they are being paid by the government to keep it at that level.

But that is only true because we are at such teeny tiny volume that they can use biogas from landfills and other such sources. If hydrogen were to scale up big time, this would not be possible and they would have to use normal natural gas.

Or they could try to do electrolysis and make it extremely expensive.

From electrolysis it would be $1/kg using current average wholesale wind electricity purchase agreements at 2 cnt/kWh. You know, intermittent generators are not very valuable to grid, they don’t get paid much.

Any more urban legends about evil hydrogen taking over rosy & fluffy Small Electric?

You’re making the same argument that people made against EVs 10 years ago: green generation will not increase with greater demand.

The greater the H2 demand, the more money will flow into developing better H2 production tech. It worked for wind, solar, and batteries… why is H2 immune?

sven posted more “fool cell” fanboy cabbage:

“That’s absolutely wrong.”

That’s absolutely wrong right.

There, fixed that for you.

“The Union of Concerned Scientist[s]”…

…unfortunately published a poorly researched article on the subject; one which ignored several significant factors in its EROI (Energy Return On Investment) analysis.

They should have asked the physicists who wrote this article:

http://phys.org/news/2006-12-hydrogen-economy-doesnt.html

Even the name of the stations “True Zero” is deceptive. No thanks.

CARB needs to be sued for giving so much preference to a vehicle like the Mirai in their vehicle credit structure, given how inferior it is to a plug-in electric vehicle.

BINGO.

ultimately, to automobile companies, terms like “superior” and “inferior” are defined in terms of sales. if the general public was beating down the doors to buy bev’s, i doubt that you would see much by way of fcev’s. ev enthusiasts have rationalized in their minds the trade offs that they are willing to make to drive a bev; but there aren’t enough ev enthusiasts to define a viable market segment.

Nobody’s beating down the door to buy the Mirai either. I think in their best month so far, they’ve sold 300.

At nearly $60,000, I can see why.

Anyone have a map of the route that they traveled? I looked and could not find one.

Basically . . . I think THEY JUST DROVE AROUND IN A BIG CIRCLE because there are so few refueling places that they had to backtrack the same ground to go 1400 miles.

How about taking the novelty approach and actually reading the article text instead of just trolling? They have driven from Long Beach close to Los Angeles to Reno, Nevada, visiting cities on the route. It is about 1438 round trip when you take not the straightest possible route and covers most of California.

Oh, we’re so sorry, it was a “big loop”, not a “big circle”. That makes such a big difference! 🙄

In a “straight line”, it is not possible to do this (without a hydrogen truck following along).

A diesel powered, cryogenically cooled (can you say wastes a lot of energy?) pressurized hydrogen tanker truck.

And CEO Dr. Tim Brown and First Element/Toyota/Air Products have already been thoroughly exposed as being part of the corruption and cronyism around the disastrous CARB decisions regarding the perpetual H2 Fool Cell scams:

http://www.dailynews.com/opinion/20140512/conflict-of-interest-cronyism-along-the-hydrogen-highway-thomas-elias

Wow, great catch.
It’s worth reading, for sure.

Yep, its something that the resident H2/fool cell shills like sven, zzzzzz, Sd, 4E (who not coincidentally also just happen to be serial Tesla-haters) just like to ignore these pervasive corruption issues regarding H2/First Element/Air Products/Toyota.

If you looking for serious corruption you may better check New York. That is $750 mln gift from taxpayers to a private company that is about to go bankrupt unless bailed out at the expense of TSLA shareholders.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/13/elon-musks-solarcity-sucked-into-federal-corruption-probe/

Lol, did you even read the article?

Obviously not!

Serial Tesla-hater and H2 Fool cell shill zzzzzz would rather attempt a lame flip the script with an article by a right-wing libertarian “news” organization with institutional bias against PEVs and alternative energy, just like zzzzz.

Anyways, the corruption/cronyism regarding CEO of First Element and others vis a vis CARB has become well documented in stark contrast to the lame assertions by a right-wing rag that Musk is somehow implicated in a NY corruption case.

Trump has probably done what the dailycaller rails against many times.

Stunning. I had no idea that commercial interests were benefiting from the tax money wasted on California’s “hydrogen highway” in such a direct way.

Get Real, you’ve done a real service to EV advocates here. Thank you!

That article was well worth bookmarking for future reference.

i don’t understand the bev fetish that the writers at insideevs seem to have, which results in their bashing of fcev’s. there is no issue of “truth in advertising” when people refer to fcev’s as “electric cars”; after all, the acronym “fcev” stands for “fuel cell electric vehicle”.

Because the word electric means not only the motor but the energy source.
FCEV is an hydrogen car as far as I am concern, because without it, it won’t move.
A gas car is a car that won’t move without gas, same as diesel or CNG.
So an electric car won’t move without electricity and I mean electricity that you fill her up, not producing it onboard with any means, because if you need one, you just have to call it the way it is

the propulsion in an fcev is an electric motor. the difference between an fcev and a bev is not over *whether* one is an electric vehicle or not, the difference is *where* the electricity is generated. in a bev, the electricity is generated outside of the vehicle; in an fcev, the electricity is generated inside of the vehicle.

electricity in a bev doesn’t appear, *poof*, by magic, out of thin air. so the proper measure of whether a vehicle is an electric vehicle is one of propulsion. it is, after all, called an electric *vehicle*.

It is true that FCEVs use electricity to power the drive train. It’s also true that FCEVs have a fairly large battery for peak load times that the fuel cell can’t keep up with electricity production.

I think InsideEVs (and us commenters) would be happier with FCEVs if:

1. The fueling infrastructure was nation-wide.
2. ALL the hydrogen was created renewably (instead of cracking methane or other ways of extracting hydrogen from hydrocarbons). The energy put into creating the hydrogen is pretty lossy — around 50-55% — but if the energy source was 100% renewable (e.g., solar) then it would be less of a problem.
3. They would have better performance.
4. They stop getting super-preferential treatment for CARB credits.

with regard to your points 1 and 2: fcev is a fairly early stage technology; it is so early stage that it makes bev look like a “mature” technology. so your expectations on these points are not reasonable given the state of fcev technology.

with regard to point 3: this is a frivolous point; all that is needed is “reasonable” performance, nobody *really* needs to be going from 0-60 in 2.3 seconds. the fixation on this point that i see from ev enthusiasts seems silly to me.

with regard to point 4: carb credits are incentive to auto makers to influence how they make decisions about what automotive concepts they will develop. as an auto buyer, i don’t see where this is an issue of such concern to you.

Djoni said:

“So an electric car won’t move without electricity and I mean electricity that you fill her up, not producing it onboard with any means…”

So, you mean not generating electricity onboard by the chemical reactions occurring inside rechargeable batteries?

I guess, then, that to you, “electric vehicle” means it has to have a very long extension cord! 😉

I don’t think we EV advocates are going to turn up our noses at an EV that’s powered by a metal-air fuel cell (often mis-labeled a “battery”), nor will future generations stop calling it an “EV” if the onboard electrical generation system is something like a “Mr. Fusion” device.

The problem with “fool cell” cars isn’t that they aren’t EVs. Not all EVs have a plug.

The problem with hydrogen-powered FCEVs, and the reason they don’t deserve serious consideration, is the colossal waste of energy, and the extreme amount of pollution, required to power the things with a fuel as impractical and wasteful as compressed hydrogen.

Because it’s grossly inefficient, that’s why. (Remember: MPGe is just a quick and dirty comparative number to demonstrate how efficiently the vehicle uses its energy, not how efficient the supply chain is) Toyota Mirai MPGe: 67 MPG Toyota Prius MPGe: 50 MPG Nissan Leaf MPGe: 114 MPG Well okay, you’re getting an extra 17 mpg in a Mirai over a Prius. You also pay an extra: Prius MSRP: $25,378 Mirai MSRP: $58,491 Uh, $33,113, or 130%. Compared to an extra $3,700 for the Leaf. But you get warm fuzzies from saving the environment, right? From the TrueZero Hydrogen FAQ: “Q: Hydrogen is in water. Can’t we get it from water instead of fossil fuels? A: Yes. But the widespread application of this process isn’t here yet. Hydrogen is extracted from water through electrolysis–an electric current passing through water to separate the hydrogen. The electricity can be sourced from clean, renewable energy such as wind, hydro-electric power or solar. The clean nature of this process is why building out a hydrogen infrastructure and putting hydrogen cars on the road is so important.” So, you might as well literally be burning compressed natural gas in an ICE for all the good it… Read more »

Do any plug-in owners on this site have a Mirai lease? Or anyone waiting on delivery on one?

Just wondering about some first hand impressions from someone with seat time in both.

Why are some people so hostile to R&D type development? Technology advances and the market will determine the future. It may turn out to be a mix of technologies for an extended period. The more the merrier. There is plenty of seawater available for electrolysis(and for desalination) and there is an abundance of off peak power available.
Nobody “knows” what will happen in the future. The vitriol is unintellectual unnecessary. You don’t like the prospects for FCEV so what, are you some kind of spooky governmet determinist that can dictate science as Josef Stalin? Get real people.

As someone has pointed out, fuel cell EVs make an interesting science fair experiment. But we’ve done quite enough experimenting to know how energy-inefficient they are; how wasteful and polluting it is to power the things with something as impractical and difficult to use as compressed hydrogen. “Fool cell” cars certainly are not something that California and other States should be wasting taxpayer money on. That is the objection. * * * * * A quote: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I don’t want to turn this into a debate on hydrogen fuel cells, because I just think that they’re extremely silly. There’s multiple rebuttals of it online. It’s just very difficult to make hydrogen and store it and use it in a car. Hydrogen is an energy storage mechanism, it’s not a source of energy. So you have to get that hydrogen from somewhere. If you get that hydrogen from water, you’re splitting H2O. Electrolysis is extremely inefficient as an energy process. If you took a solar panel and used the energy from that solar panel to just charge a battery pack directly-—compared to try to split water, take the hydrogen, dump the oxygen, compress the hydrogen to an extremely high pressure—-or liquefy… Read more »

Average speed of 60 mph (including stops) on public roads. Smells fishy.

As the photo in the article shows, there were actually two cars. I’m guessing they staged this in “relay race” fashion, in some manner the article doesn’t make clear.

Yeah, it’s very difficult to maintain an average speed of 60 MPH over the course of many hours when driving on public roads, unless you do a lot of traveling at dangerously high speeds (driving on the Autobahn excepted). Having one driving team take a break while the other team drives would explain how they managed that without unsafe driving.

“The point has been made that an electric car can do everything that a gasoline car can do, but with zero emissions.”

Really? That’s not what True Zero says:

“Producers of hydrogen today derive hydrogen from petroleum, natural gas, coal and bio-mass. Through chemical processing, hydrogen atoms are separated from those fuel stocks mostly by way of steam. Then, the hydrogen is captured and compressed as a gas that is stored in tanks.

One third of TrueZero fuel is renewable and we’re continuously working to increase that number. Our fuel means cleaner air and fewer greenhouse gas emissions.”

Ref: http://www.truezero.com/sources-of-hydrogen/

Also, when they say “renewable” they seem to mean “biomass methane”

From their FAQ:

“Q: Hydrogen is in water. Can’t we get it from water instead of fossil fuels?

A: Yes. But the widespread application of this process isn’t here yet. Hydrogen is extracted from water through electrolysis–an electric current passing through water to separate the hydrogen. The electricity can be sourced from clean, renewable energy such as wind, hydro-electric power or solar. The clean nature of this process is why building out a hydrogen infrastructure and putting hydrogen cars on the road is so important.”

They’re full of bullshit, is what this is.