Toyota Provides Mobile Half-Fill Hydrogen Refuel Stations For Mirai In US While Waiting On Infrastructure

OCT 30 2015 BY JAY COLE 130

Toyota Launched The Fuel Cell Mirai In The US Last Week

Toyota Launched The Fuel Cell Mirai In The US Last Week

Limited first deliveries of the Toyota Mirai in California started about a week ago (we note two registrations already in California at time of press) despite the current refuelling station situation still being a little more than lacking throughout the state.

List Of Active and Planned Hydrogen Stations In California (via Toyota - Sept 2015) - Click To Enlarge

List Of Active and Planned Hydrogen Stations In California (via Toyota – Sept 2015) – Click To Enlarge

Currently two public stations are Mirai-friendly, with another three coming online by the end of the month (see chart at right of all the known/planned stations through the end of 2016 – as provided by Toyota at the end of September).

53 stations currently are at some stage of construction.

Friend of the site, Doug A, states that the approved 8 Mirai dealers in California currently each have a 10 person VIP short list of prospective buyers (of which Doug is one) to get a new fuel cell car.

Given the widespread nature of the dealers, and the potential for so many Mirais limited to just a handful of stations this year, Toyota is setting up mobile hydrogen refuelers at 4 of the dealerships through next summer 2016: Roseville, Sunnyvale, San Jose, and San Francisco

In an email to Doug, Roseville stated that all fuel from these units will be no charge and not included in the $15,000 worth of hydrogen Toyota is already offering with each Mirai purchase.

The only catch?  These units “only dispense hydrogen at 5000 psi, or 350 BAR, so it will give the Mirai half the distance on a full fill (150 miles),” and a call ahead appointment is needed to fill up.

Below is the part of the email send to future Mirai owners from Roseville Toyota:

Hello Mirai Trailblazers!

How are you? If you are receiving this email, you have placed an order for a Mirai from … Roseville Toyota. It has been awhile since I have followed up with my Mirai customers and I wanted to take a moment to check in and tell you about all of the exciting things that are happening at Roseville Toyota.

We will be delivering our first Mirai this Friday and two more the following week. Our dealership is the first in the state to deliver this exciting new car! In addition, Roseville Toyota will have a mobile hydrogen refueler here at the dealership through next summer 2016. This fuel will be free of charge to our customers and will be in addition to the $15,000 in free fuel that Toyota is already offering. We only ask that you let us know when you are coming in to fuel so we can arrange to have someone fuel your Mirai when you arrive. These mobile refuelers will also be placed at the Toyota dealerships in Sunnyvale, San Jose, and San Francisco.

Toyota Mirai fact sheet/mailer from Roseville Toyota:

Toyota Mirai One-Sheet (via Doug A/Roseville Toyota)

Toyota Mirai One-Sheet (via Doug A/Roseville Toyota)

Our thanks to Doug A!

Categories: Toyota


Leave a Reply

130 Comments on "Toyota Provides Mobile Half-Fill Hydrogen Refuel Stations For Mirai In US While Waiting On Infrastructure"

newest oldest most voted

Now if they could just make a station that I can put in my garage and fill up my own car every day.. even if it only goes to 2,500 PSI… that’d be enough for daily driving.

Where would you source the H2 to fill up at home?

It’s simple: have a small steam-methane reforming hydrogen generator to convert natural gas to hydrogen (fortunately, the 1000° steam needed for this process can be produced by burning some of the natural gas coming into the system). Once enough hydrogen has been collected you can then compress it to the needed 2500 PSI pressure and store it in your own cyro tank until needed. Only the high pressure parts of the system will have to be tested and/or replaced every ten years or so, the 1000° steam boiler should last longer than that.

Why not just donate an extra 5 dollars a gallon to Exxon at every purchase.

I don’t understand the need for a cryo tank. That seem rather pointless.

It increases the density of the hydrogen so more can be stored (in liquid form).

Whatever is cheapest of course, but I have a hard time believing it is cheaper to liquefy hydrogen than stuff it into a low pressure tank.

Sure, it’s cheaper (and uses less energy) to pressurize H2 to a lower pressure. But the lower the pressure, the bigger the car’s tank needs to be to make up for it, if you want the car to have the same range.

Nobody wants to drive around a “car” with a gas tank as big as a tanker truck! But I presume you didn’t actually mean “low pressure”; I presume you meant “lower pressure”.


It’s pretty simple. I hate the complexity of my EVSE equipment.

I was too cheap to buy a proper charger so I just use the supplied EVSE with an outdoor socket. Solid three years use with no problems.

Long term, you should take the plunge.
L2 charging is more efficient, you’ll save more money.

… and what you end up with is a fossil fuel much more expensive than gasoline. Congratulations.

Honda had the fill device years ago, it reformed natural gas and/or electrolysis of water in your garage, they still offer this device.

Yeah, I certainly don’t want any neighbor of mine dealing with a high-pressure hydrogen system.

We’ve all see the Fukushima videos, right?

As a general rule, no, I don’t think people are up to date on the current Fukushima problems. MOX fuel from Fuku #3 produced a detonation (faster than sonic speed), (a ‘prompt criticality’, i.e. a Nuclear Explosion) as opposed to the other deflagrations. People are still apparently eating west coast Sushi, and Alaskan fish, when you’d think a certain amount of caution would be advised. Of course many very rich people are selling their Ocean Front properties, capitalizing on the remaining still high property values, such as John Depp and Tom Cruise. Anyone who keeps abreast of news items must be concerned about the very high animal die offs in the Pacific for the past few years. Of course, Biologists, for public consumption, complain its some strange virus or Global Warming, since to tell what I’d assume they really know would cost them their jobs. It is quite interesting that the EPA will test for Combustion Products ONLY. They’ll issue a warning for that HORRENDOUS carbon dioxide, but they have blinders on to anything else. Its so nice that they are so worried about a supposed ‘poison’ that the most delicate orchid will thrive in, yet be totally unconcerned about… Read more »

Uh . . . well that was more than I asked for.

I was just referencing the hydrogen explosions they had.

But as far as radioactivity goes, I live on the west coast and am not worried. I wouldn’t live anywhere near Fukushima but the dilution & dissipation that took place as the plume crossed the ocean means it is pretty low levels.

I’m glad you’re unconcerned.

No, there were no nuclear explosion at Fukushima. It was hydrogen split from the cooling water because of the temperature that exploded.

The rest of your comment is conspiratorial nonsense. A lot of things are continually monitored, including radioactivity. There is no evil cabal out to destroy humanity.

Prove it.

So I suppose Chernobyl is the sister city of Fukishima. Two modern day ghost towns that will remain that way for many decades. Great Job Tepco. The men who designed that POS should have been shot.

No less than 3 General Electric engineers retired prematurely after the turnup of Unit #1 (decades ago of course), since they wanted changes made to GE’s “MARK I through MARK III” designs. They claimed the containment (the upside down light bulb) was too small to contain any abnormal operation.

Its somewhat comforting to note that there were some principled guys in that company.

I’ve heard that it was the fine folks at GE that designed and site engineered the Fukushima reactors. It’s the third time we’ve nuc’d japan. Yes, we had their support on this third incident.

Is there a single advantage that fuel cell cars have over electric? I know some people say range, but for the price of a fuel cell car (heavily subsidized to boot) you can get a comp range EV.

The advantage is we stay captives of the fueling station and pay dearly for fracked methane hydrogen.

You may also crack water for hydrogen fuel. Use solar or wind power to keep it green.

You’d still be much farther ahead charging a battery with that solar or wind power.

At three thousand dollars to store one dollar of electricity, batteries are not competitive with hydrogen for energy storage. Take the money you save and buy more solar and wind with it.

At about $41,666 per “fool cell” car to build a H2 fueling station, and that’s using optimistic assumptions*, and at about $14-15 per kg for “renewable” hydrogen fuel, there’s no way that the fuel for FCEVs will ever get even remotely close to being cost-competitive with the cost of recharging plug-in EVs.


1. The cost to build a H2 fueling station is $1.5 million dollars (costs up to $2 million have been cited)

2. A single H2 fueling station can service 36 cars per day. (The highest volume ones service between 24-36 FCEVs.) Compare to ordinary gas stations, which service an average of ~1100 cars per day (some say 2500/day).

* * * * *

Take the money entrepreneurs save and install more “clean” electricity sources, including new nuclear power plants.

Storing even a quarter of the US annual generation of electricity from summer to winter and would cost $145 trillion dollars in batteries. Storing half of it for 24 hours would cost $800 billion. This is why, when it comes to renewables, hydrogen energy storage is superior. The math will never work out for industrial scale battery deployments. Other technologies just cost less.

There is a place for Hydrogen at the energy suppliers banquet table. Sadly a small one. It is a high chair at the far end of table, where a fuzzy baby keeps throwing things on the floor and making a general mess demanding to be the center of attention.

When it grows up someday it can sit at the kids table, then the table where the adults are, but that will be years from now.
Its an analogy!

Wait, you forgot the conversion losses.
The battery systems, which are going in now, have minimum conversion losses. Taking electricity and “converting” methane to hydrogen, or water to hydrogen has huge conversion losses.

Using the electricity directly is far more economic.

Secondly, battery prices are high now, because of insufficient supply. LG chem and Tesla are both addressing this issue.

Hydrogen is DEAD, if your dead in 5 years, you’re dead today. Because only a fool would spend multi-million dollar investments with just a 5 year payback period.

It’s simply not done.

The only advantage I’m aware of is faster refuel time.

Only if the station works, and nobody is there in front of you, and the station is on or close to your normal route.

Only if you live next to a hydrogen station. Then it’s a complete loss of time.

“Is there a single advantage that fuel cell cars have over electric?”

Hmmm… I can’t think of any.

Unless you are talking about advantage as in the case of malicious purpose…

Let’s see. A 300 mile range fuel cell Mirai, a full size sedan costs me $45K. And it refuels in 5-10 mins.
A 300 mile range Tesla P90D ( wait,.. that’s still SHORT of 300 miles) costs me north of $114K. Hmm! Tough decision to make.

See through wrote: “Let’s see. A 300 mile range fuel cell Mirai, a full size sedan costs me $45K. And it refuels in 5-10 mins.” Except Mirai is only midsize that seats 4 people and has a performance only similar to a Prius (which is pretty slow). $45K is only after all the state and federal incentives if you qualify. Pre-incentive price is nearly $65K. The refueling 5-10 mins is a myth assuming: 1. You can find a full fill stations available (which is no where close to reality) 2. It typically takes 10 mins, not 5 mins. 3. It also assumes that there are no other cars in front of you which would require extra wait time as the H2 station have to pump the fuels up to 10,000 PSI in order to fill your car. 4. Apparently half fill stations don’t give you full range or the same speed. 5. You have to waste your already limited range in getting to few H2 stations if they are even within your reach. ” A 300 mile range Tesla P90D ( wait,.. that’s still SHORT of 300 miles) costs me north of $114K. Hmm! Tough decision to make.” P90D is… Read more »

MMF, leave him be. If he can’t see that he’s describing over priced, under performing gas car with all the disadvantages, he’s obviously a troll.

See Through is a Toyota employee, so discussing this with him is really a waste of your good time.

That was just too easy, but thanks for taking the time to write it.

So there’s “going to be” 53 hydrogen stations… And the mobile units require calling ahead for an appointment?

And how many Superchargers are there? And you can find them right from your dashboard.

The advantage of Fool Cell vehicles is that fools will like them.

This means some day they will own 50-85% market share… Now i can see why toyota is pushing them 😀

KumarP asked:

“Is there a single advantage that fuel cell cars have over electric? I know some people say range, but for the price of a fuel cell car (heavily subsidized to boot) you can get a comp range EV.”

The only advantages FCEVs have over plug-in EVs are the same ones which gasmobiles have, and of course with a gasmobile you can find a place to buy a full tank of gas (not just half a tank) within 10 miles of almost any place with paved roads, and pay far less for the fuel… that is, once Toyota’s subsidy for free H2 runs out.

Gasmobiles are also considerably less polluting, on average, when considered on a well-to-wheel basis.

Bottom line: The “hydrogen highway” is nothing but a huge confidence game promoted by natural gas sellers.

Pushmi-Pullyu said:
“Gasmobiles are also considerably less polluting, on average, when considered on a well-to-wheel basis.”

That’s absolutely WRONG. Gasmobiles are considerably more polluting well-to-wheels. The Union of Concerned Scientists compared the WTW emissions of a gasoline Hyundai Tuscon and a hydrogen FCEV Hyundai Tuscon. The gasoline Tuscon emits 436 g CO2eq/mile, while the Tuscon FCEV emits 286 g CO2eq/mile with hydrogen from natural gas (34% less), 202 g CO2eq/mile with 33% renewable
California hydrogen as required by law (54% less), and 173 g CO2eq/mile with 46% renewable California hydrogen, which is actual percentage currently sold in California (60% less).

The GREET1 2014 Wheels-To-Wheels analysis by the Dept of Energy’s Argonne National Lab also concludes that gasmobiles pollute considerably more than hydrogen fuel cell vehicles.

“Such evolution has already been the norm among plug-in electric vehicles, including the Nissan Leaf; in just three years on the market, the Leaf lowered
its electricity consumption by more than 10 percent, from 0.34
to 0.30 kWh/mile. And because fuel cell vehicles share many components with plug-in electric vehicles, advances such as improved electric motors or more e cient power systems will bene t fuel cell vehicles too.”

Or, we could just stick with the purest form of transportation, the EV, and enjoy it’s constant improvement, without Incentivizing the dying Fracking Industry.

The Fresh Water Destroying Fracking industry.

Sounds so simple! I’m done with Toyota once our RAV EV is out of warranty. The whole hydrogen thing reminds me of the ethanol boondoggle.

1) H2 Trailblazers take the risks that make it easier for future buyers. 1st Generation hybrid trailblazers tolerated 0-60 mph in 12.6 sec. to set the stage for the current generation of EV’s and H2 vehicles

2) E85 is no hoax. Diesel engine manufacturers recently learned that high-compression engines are more suitable to E85 fuel – nearly double the power and torque of similar displacement diesel engines – and a fraction of the emissions. Cummins is the manufacturer to watch for small truck E85 engines.

3) E85 fuel derived from new crops like miscanthus (a bamboo-like grass) delivers a negative well-to-wheel carbon footprint because it sequesters more CO2 than is emitted by efficient vehicles.

“These units “only dispense hydrogen at 5000 psi, or 350 BAR, so it will give the Mirai half the distance on a full fill (150 miles),” and a call ahead appointment is needed to fill up.”

Epic fail.

You need an appointment to halfway fill up your car. LOL.

Also keep in mind that it’s not likely that you’ll be able to fill the tank more than halfway full – so if you’re at 25% full, you can only fill it another 25% to 50% and perhaps pick up 75 miles range at most, assuming 300 miles range on a 100% fill.

Seriously . . . that is crazy. Yeah, EVs charge slow but I can do it at home.

Having a car that you need an appointment in order to go someplace and fill it up half-way sounds amazingly inconvenient.

Yeah, “only” 5000 psi vs 10000 psi. A 10k psi tank of anything is extremely dangerous.

Half fill?, LMFAO!

More half-assed from the Hydrogen-pushers I say.

Reading the fine print of the Roseville Toyota e-mail, it appears the fuel cell-related warranty is 8 years/100,000 miles in California. And the CARB rebate is $5,000.

CARB required GM offer a 10-year/150,000 mile warranty on the Volt battery, Voltec drive train, and anything else related to emissions controls. They required the upgraded warranty to make the Volt eligible for a $1,500 CARB rebate.

Talk about blatant governmental favoritism for hydrogen!

The new Volt is only required for 8year/100K miles.

But I agree with your points.

CARB has always been pro-Toyota.

Actually, Toyota has always been effectively pushing low emissions technology since they were excluded from the Supercar program of the early 90’s. The DOE program was unleashing $billions in subsidies and offering free patent licensing to domestic manufacturers only to have them pocket the cash and bury the intellectual property.

Everyone’s laughing at FCEV, but I’m genuinely curious if they have something up their sleeves that we don’t know about. I mean, they can’t be this stupid, can they?

Well, this is all pretty small potatoes at this point. If you basically get a nice luxury car for $30,000 and then can pawn it off on the next guy before the $15,000 fuel subsidy ends (or the $500/per diem for breakdowns), some people may think its great to get the “Latest and Greatest”.

I’m very curious though about Toyota’s motivation. They claim it is more important to them, than the prius.

At least Ford is returning to profitability with their big decision to go to aluminum F-150’s, in fact, having their most profitable quarter ever.

But the Toyota thing really is a head scratcher. We already have EV’s and Gas powered vehicles. AND Phev’s which give you the best of both worlds. Not sure I see what is so compelling about H2 vehicles.

It is more important to Toyota because Japan is transitioning to a hydrogen economy. The infrastructure will be built and the efficiency of producing hydrogen from many sources is increasing every day.

Japan’s hydrogen economy is an interesting one, too. They have to import natural gas since they have no reserves, so unless they’re creating their own hydrogen from water, they’re using an expensive imported fuel to create it.

It’s still a net win for Japan. If they went electric instead, the battery storage required would bankrupt them. Hydrogen from solar, wind and nuclear, or even natural gas, are better options.

As I recall, the numbers you use to justify your “too expensive” claim for using electricity for power, assumes the batteries are used only once and then thrown away.

If you have to go that far out of your way to twist the truth, then it’s pretty obvious you yourself don’t believe what you’re claiming.

simple math, dedicate a multi-story building, filled with rechargeable batteries, x-square-foot = what sustained (drain) output.
Ignoring the valuation of the property and just the investment for 15 years of steady use, how many World-Trade centers of batteries do you need for the absolute-minimum of for-whatever-reason battery power.

..or use underground caverns and store H2 there, using it for worst case scenario and beyond.
Japan decided that H2 wins. No twisting.

Yes, the Japanese make brilliant decisions regarding their energy supply and where it should come from, and how and where it should be built.
Oh we messed up, lets turn off all the nuclear power stations… (years go by). Ooh noooo, that was a mistake, we think, lets turn them all back on. Gosh that cost a lot of Kwatloos.
Hey I know lets invest in Hydrogen, there has to be more than one way to bankrupt a country.

Sounds like BS to me. Japan’s non-hydro renewable (hydro would use pumped storage, not hydrogen) mix is so low that storage isn’t even an issue. Japan’s energy plan for 2030 does not talk at all about hydrogen being a viable energy storage mechanism (it doesn’t talk much about energy storage in the first place given it also is not optimistic about the growth of renewables, even including hydro).

You might be able to make the argument for Germany, but hydrogen doesn’t make much sense in Japan.

Their big plan is to ship hydrogen made from coal in Australia using large container ships (which don’t exist yet). Right now all the talk about a “hydrogen economy” is to build up for the 2020 Olympics (we have seen similar bids for the Vancouver and London Olympics).

No, surprisingly Japan has frackers too.
This is just another example where corporate carbon can Bribe a democracy to move in the direction they want.

This is actually the type of thing Democracy is supposed to stop. Picking the best solution without monetary reward. But, as you see in the USA, Democracy can be easily manipulated by money. The longer the campaign trail the more money is required to run, BUY Design.

Agreed that Japan is definitely one of the better places to use these vehicles, what with their currently grave electricity shortage, and the high-cost of obtaining the replacement.

Under these ‘Ideal’ conditions for Hydrogen Vehicles, it will be interesting to see 2 things:

1). What percentage of the population ends up voluntarily choosing these vehciles, and:

2). How many Hydrogen filling stations are provided per 10,000 cars.

No. Even in Japan Solar and Nissan Leafs are a better, safer and cheaper solution.

My guess is that it’s some upper management person who wants to save face.

The century old Petro-Automobile cartel I told you, not stupidity, Cupidity.

Curious? Yes me too.
Another thing struck me:

“$15,000 worth of hydrogen Toyota is already offering with each Mirai purchase”

That’s ≈150,000 miles worth of gasoline for a 30mpg car.
Haven’t quite figured out what this says about the imminent FCEV revolution (don’t worry – it’s going to be imminent for quite a while).
o Shows what a hard sell FCEV really is?
o Gives a clue about expected cost of H2 fueling going forward?

I also really do wonder about the mindset of those who would put themselves through this H2 hell – for what?

Actually, I was more curious about Toyota and others who are pushing FCEV. From all obvious angles, FC just doesn’t make sense. Do do they know something that we don’t? I mean, if consumers have to go to “fuel” station and it costs similar or more to fuel, why would they buy FCEV instead of gas cars?

Unless government mandates it through strict environmental laws forbidding gas cars… Oh boy, here we go again!

ZEV credits.

Toyota will get far more ZEV credits per car than BEVs.


California Subsidy is the driver.
Kill that and Hydrogen dies the death it deserves.

SparkEV: A few factors come to mind: 1. The fossil fuel industry knows full well that it’s in the global warming/peak oil end game. 2. Who makes virtually all the H2 currently and has the related production, storage and shipping expertise? Answer – the FF industry, for use in their own refineries and for most other industrial H2 purposes. H2 made from fossils of course (natural gas, typically). 3. Who would like to remain the transportation fuel supplier/gatekeeper/price fixer? Answer . . . On the auto production side: 1. The auto industry is just as aware that it’s in the end game too, but the stark reality is that battery supplies will be grossly inadequate for full scale EV-only production for many a year – even if the could turn the overweight battleship around. Even little Tesla had to indulge in some Giga-thinking to envision supplying just their own battery needs. 2. FCEVs. like hybrids, only need fractional sized batteries. Look for our revered congress critters and state legislators, often so down on anything renewable, green or threatening to the status quo, to be remarkably acquiescent to the “H2 revolution”. They may even valiantly carry the battle forward. Conspiracy? –… Read more »

Meanwhile I’m enjoying my Leaf and avidly looking forward to the next phase – choosing between Tesla-3, next gen, Leaf, Bolt and whatever else pops up out of the woodwork.

Based on the latest from Nissan… 2017 and 18 should be the end of current fuel cell EVs… they are absurd… the money being wasted by our state currently will do little to change that. They are idiotic cars at this current state of EVs. They cannot compete with Tesla now… and Nissan, GM or Tesla by 2017,2018. The other big auto makers should be abandoning ICE ASAP to keep Nissan, GM and Tesla from eating their lunch… but if not… I know what I and all the sensible folks will be buying, and it won’t be ICE land blimps.

See, that’s what I don’t understand. From all obvious angles, FC is not good for consumers no matter how hard carmakers push. If the consumers don’t buy, they don’t get ZEV credits or anything else. That seems so obvious for car companies to not see it. That’s why I ask if they have something up their sleeves. Why keep pushing such obvious loser?

Or maybe carmakers are that stupid?

SparkEV asked:

“Everyone’s laughing at FCEV, but I’m genuinely curious if they have something up their sleeves that we don’t know about. I mean, they can’t be this stupid, can they?”

Natural gas suppliers have been successful in lobbying the governments of California and Japan, to promote the “hydrogen highway”. What is shocking is the level and frequency of truth-twisting and outright lies which Toyota is using to promote what obviously will be a short-term boondoggle.

Lists of companies (including natural gas suppliers) promoting the “hydrogen highway” in California and in Japan can be found at the following two links:

Short term boondoggle for what, 3 years? 5 years? Then what? As I said, FC is ridiculous from all obvious angles, and consumers aren’t likely to buy. Unless they (carmakers, cartel, gov’t, whoever) can make consumers buy FC, there is no way it’s going to take.

This is why I ask if there’s something we’re missing. It’s so obviously stupid that I can’t imagine guys at Toyota, etc will continue to sink money in it, unless they have something up their sleeves. Maybe I’m overthinking this, but it’s hard to imagine that they are that stupid.

That’s one reason why Toyota is happy to only sell a few hundred FCEVs a year. They’ll definitely be able to find a small number of curious tech enthusiasts with deep pockets. Then they can turn around and say, “WOW look at the demand!”. It’s like when they got all excited because 1,900 people signed up for more information on the Mirai. Only 1,900 people! In a state that sells almost 10x that many BEVs in a year, costing more than the Mirai.

If you assume that 70% of world cant charge their EV at home and 30min for charging is not accepted. Further we know oil is decreasing, therefore FCVH seems to be the best solution.

I myself rather charge my BEV once a week for 30-45 min at a local station than to pay ~double the TCO compared to a FCVH and “charge” in 5 minutes. It’s a money/time battle, that is all.

I think BEV will not charge faster than 20-25min (0-80%) in the future because of cost for better batteries and better charger. And i think Toyota has a plan how cost of FCVH is going down and will match that of ICE, but fuel cost will stay high compared to BEV.

“If you assume that 70% of world cant charge their EV at home” This is only for now. 50% (probably lot more) don’t have access to reliable electricity with frequent blackouts, etc, but that doesn’t mean it’ll be that way forever. If the past is any indication, it’ll get better, not worse. “and 30min for charging is not accepted.” It depends on how much that cost. If 30min charging saves 50% compared to alternatives, there will be lots of takers. You only have to look at gas car drivers driving half way across town to save $0.01/gal gas. “Further we know oil is decreasing, therefore FCVH seems to be the best solution.” By oil decreasing, I think you mean the supply is decreasing, not the price. That’s not the case. Supply was decreasing only with relation to cost and technology of exploration. Now we have more oil than before. In absolute terms, we won’t run out any time soon, maybe even for 1000 years. Warning: may contain NSFW “I myself rather charge my BEV once a week for 30-45 min at a local station than to pay ~double the TCO compared to a FCVH and “charge” in 5 minutes.… Read more »

Ok you get 0-80% in your spark EV today. That is great, but i dont think batteries that are three time as big as the ones today will be charged within 5 minutes in the future. That would be a 150*4=450kW charger. I know those exist, but i think they will remain to expensive to make a good business case.

Dont misunderstand me, i also think BEVs are far better, even without filling station at home. I just wanted to share what Toyota might be thinking:
-no home charger possible
-EVs charge slow (>5min and most if em +/-30min today)
-because of less oil price of oil will increase (within 20-50 years)

Most drivers would have to make an appointment at least twice a week!

“We’re sorry, but Rosedale Toyota is now closed. To leave a message, press one, to dial an extension by number, press two, to return to the main menu, press nine…”

Go Toyota! My next car will be a Mirai and a Honda Clarity.

ST your genius reaches far and wide.

So I found some marbles, missing any? I feel as if you have lost yours.

I guess you like slow and expensive cars that are also limited in range and ugly to look at…


So he’s a fuel cell pimp. I thought he was just a Tesla troll.


Thirty thousand unit sales ahead, Ahab!

Well to me almost everything that I have read from Toyota seems like they are shouting out loud:




I don’t really believe that the engineers at Toyota believe in a hydrogen future… And to me it looks like Toyota is really trying hard to protect their customers from buying/leasing a mirai…

Somehow, some are alread infected with the hydrogen-virus… (Like most here are infected with the EV-virus) 😉

If you don’t believe that Toyota Engineer’s believe in a Hydrogen Future, you are ignoring the entire Japanese Economy. It’s virtually a mandate there to transition to a hydrogen economy.

And Exxon, BP, Shell and Chevron LOVE them for it.

I think this is going to be as successful as Japan’s analog HDTV system.

Yeah, it works. But everyone else realized that it was not the right technology path to go down.

taser54 said:

“If you don’t believe that Toyota Engineer’s believe in a Hydrogen Future, you are ignoring the entire Japanese Economy.”

Not at all. Toyota engineers, by not speaking out about how the “hydrogen highway” can only be a short-term boondoggle, are exhibiting the Japanese cultural tendency to follow their leaders and not make waves.

In the West, we say “The squeaky wheel gets the grease.” But in Japan, they say “The nail that sticks out gets hammered down.”

I have no doubt that Toyota’s engineers understand the Laws of Physics, and Thermodynamics, as well as their Western counterparts. But they want to keep their jobs.

But then you’re assuming the Japanese leaders are morons. Uhh. Umm. Ok. I see your point…

I like my EV virus, thank you. 😉

I know! Lets make a mobile EV charger that is guarenteed to ONLY give you half a charge!

Brilliant, yes? 😉

Amusing. So half of 150 is 75, so say the station is 10 miles away that’s 20 miles off the 75, for 55 miles worth of range. Well at least its free, for a while.

Not only that, it isn’t even half of a charge, it is only from whatever amount of H2 you had in your tank UP TO 50% full! (ie it won’t take you from 30% – 80% full)

Even worse, as you say.

Looks like there are about 250 supercharger stations in the US now with approx 1500 stalls (rough guess). Im thinking they will have 600 in the US before there are 100 H2 stations, this wont count the thousands of level 2 and 3 chargers and millions of at home chargers. says there are 230 USA Supercharger Stations today, with 11 under construction, and 11 in permit stage, so not quite 250 yet, but coming close!

Plus, “Chademo quick charger installation site number up to today is 9197.
– (Japan 5484 Europe 2352 America 1306 other 55) October 22, 2015 update” (The English page for is down, so I used Google Translate to capture that!)

Does the Quick refueling of the Mirai allow you to make it from L.A. to New York Faster than the slower charging Tesla Model S? How about the slower charging Nissan LEAF? How about from L.A. to Seattle, WA. then? Could it even beat the Ford Focus Electric on a 1,000 mile trip? Anywhere?

Outside of the CARB credits, who can actually benefit using this FCV, besides it allows Toyota to sell that many more Tundra’s!

“Does the Quick refueling of the Mirai allow you to make it from L.A. to New York Faster than the slower charging Tesla Model S?”

Sure, as long as you have a H2 fuel truck following your “fool cell” car all the way. 😉

Or maybe it would take two trucks, since the tanker loses pressure every time it fills up the Mirai.


A round-trip from San Francisco to Los Angeles. 😀

SVEN, I think you broke the context of the question!! The ‘Anywhere’ point was tided to the question right before it! Take another look at the sentence: “Could it even beat the Ford Focus Electric on a 1,000 mile trip? Anywhere?” First – you forgot the first part of the question – in part A – Could it beat the Ford Focus Electric – and does your story show a comparable trip from A-B-A even with the FFE? Second, I did not say 500 miles out and 500 miles back – totaling 1,000 miles, but – 1,000 miles in one direction! By Comparison – Nissan LEAF’s and other EV’s have Driven from BC to BC (Baha California to British Columbia) as seen on their website: “The third annual BC2BC-2015, “All Electric Vehicle Rally”, 3000 miles from Mexico to Canada and return, will take place on September 13 through September 20, 2015.” – Of course – it Toyota took some of their (Maybe now a bit less than) $65 Billion in Cash Reserves, and used their own money to put in Hydrogen Fueling Stations between Cities – they could make the H2 Infrastructure a bit more usable for their Mirai… Read more »

Or: Question: If a Hydrogen powered train left L.A. at 10 o’clock at 100 miles an hour when would it meet an electric train leaving from New York at the same time and at the same speed.

Answer: Never. There is no such thing as a Hydrogen train.

Robert, I didn’t think I broke the context of your question, as I thought the “Anywhere?” question and all the other questions in the paragraph were tided to the “faster than” question in the first sentence of that paragraph. The questions preceding the “Anywhere?” question included comparisons to a faster charging and long range Tesla, slower charging and shorter range LEAF and Focus Electric, various length road trips including a very long cross-country road trip from LA to NY, a shorter LA to Seattle road trip, and an even shorter 1,000 mile road trip. I thought a LA to SF round trip was a valid example to compare driving times since the distance one way is beyond the range of any BEV and HFCV, and would require charging/fueling to complete the trip. It is also a very common road trip as evidenced by the heavy Tesla traffic at the Harris Ranch Supercharger station. The driving times for a Tesla can be calculated by using the Supercharger or the battery swap station at Harris Ranch, and destination charging if calculating the driving/fueling time for a round trip (a couple of seconds to plug/unplug if you’re not waiting around while the BEV… Read more »

May the Super charger stations and home power point and those also with Home solar (Drive on Sunshine) WIN

May Hydrogen fuel just vaporise and waft away – the inefficient crap that it really is.

Pity the poor suckers that buy a Hydrogen fueled car.

I’ve been following the technology since 1978. I expected the technology to manifest first in standard internal combustion engines, but they skipped that embarrassment. Unlike fusion energy, I get to see an actual consumer product.

People sometimes observe that the dealer sales process for EVs is less than optimal (a more complex, time consuming process, due to the consumer education required).

Its kind of breathtaking to imagine the salesperson-consumer conversation that occurs during the sale of an FCV.

Consumer: “So where do I fill this thing up?”

Salesman: “Thats no problem sir. We’ve got this fuel tanker truck right here on site. You just bring your car back here and we’ll fill it up half way.”

Consumer: “Half way? I get a half tank of fuel?”

Salesman: “Yes sir. And best of all it’s free. You will need to make an appointment, and we only provide that service during business hours, but it is a heck of a deal. Free fuel!”

Consumer: “But I live 15 miles away. That would only leave me with less than 115 miles of range, because I would need to drive home and drive back here. I drive about 40 miles a day, 120 mikes in three days. So i would need to come back every two days.

Salesman: “Yes sir, we’re here for you.”

This is so great, thanks for posting, made my day.

Good luck selling them. Haha. You wohnt get EPA-credits if no one buys them. 😉

Bill Howland said: …the current Fukushima problems. MOX fuel from Fuku #3 produced a detonation (faster than sonic speed), (a ‘prompt criticality’, i.e. a Nuclear Explosion) as opposed to the other deflagrations… “Anyone who keeps abreast of news items must be concerned about the very high animal die offs in the Pacific for the past few years.” When faced with this level of foaming-at-the-mouth anti-nuclear hysteria, the only rational response is to back away slowly, avoid eye contact, and look around to make sure there are no sharp objects in sight. Checking Wikipedia for the definition of “prompt criticality”, we see that this is a process which has occurred numerous times, most commonly involving no loss of human life — that is, calling this a “nuclear explosion” is just hysterical alarmism — and that the Fukushima incident is not on the list. In other words, this is nothing but pure 100% anti-nuclear hysteria, which is par for the course from this post-er. It’s too bad that so many Americans have bought into anti-nuclear hysteria that it has become politically impossible in the USA to have a rational discussion about nuclear power plants. If humans were rational animals, we would… Read more »


You’ve just proven a 59 year old can equal the resourcefulness of a 13 year old (8 th grader) in using Wikipedia.

I’m (like many others) a Wikipedia Author. People can say anything on there, and little is fact checked.

For me, I wrote much of the information on the Merganthaler Linotype. To the best of my knowledge it is true, but it wasn’t fact checked by others. If they or others do in the future they’ll find the info I listed there was fine. Any discrepancies are trivial.

But there are several subjects under wikipedia where the truth is not the final arbiter.

To check that out, under “Mergenthaler”, click the link on “Linotype Machine”.

What is VERY SURPRIZING about that link is they even mention that Chernobyl had a ‘prompt criticality’, which for decades they would not admit in the ‘west’.

(They do say the power levels went to 10x rated power, but Belarus papers I’ve perused have said a much more reasonable 200x, since normal equipment can usually withstand 10x excursions – as a household example, my washing machine draws 95 amps while starting, (about 200 ms), which is 11x its normal current.

The wikipedia paragraph also confuses the ‘non-critical’ steam explosion prior to the dome-lifting ‘prompt criticality’, but as I say, the amazing thing is that they mention it at all.

If you had any familiarity with Work, Power, Energy, Time, and their interrelationships, the explosion (and Video) of Fuku unit #3 could not be explained by a Hydrogen Deflagration. Hydrogen, normally, cannot detonate – but you’d never believe it.

As someone that is able to do little But keep up with the news these days, I am not the teeniest bit concerned with: “Anyone who keeps abreast of news items must be concerned about the very high animal die offs in the Pacific for the past few years.” as I am unable to gleen any renowned news organizations that report that. I know that in your view that makes me contemptible, but I have found comfort in ignoring any heartache over that conclusion as well. I read everything you post here, Bill, because of your proven knowledge of many things beyond my own.. I cannot -and i have tried- find substantiation for your conclusions regarding Fukushima, Chernobyl or what appears to be all things nuclear-power related. Your comfort in concluding that ‘western media’ Chooses Not to support in writing the conclusive evidence that you and others have found is disconcerting, as ‘Their News is Wrong, but Our News is Right, was what led to the creation of the AP those many, many years ago. Regarding Wikipedia, you apparently think that it is a consortium of talentless puppets like the ‘western media’? It is always hard to tell in absolute… Read more »

Thanks for the kind words, but I can say as a Wikipedia Author myself, that much, but not all, of Wikipedia info is useful.

This is an EV group. I just sprinkle other tidbits of info in amoungst things, since it livens up the conversation, and it helps show me who is willing to entertain an alternative view and who isn’t.

But its much easier to go with the polemic. As I said to Spectaculawyer I’m glad you’re not the tiny-winiest concerned. Easier to sleep at nights that way.

2 gen following me, at least as confused about them as the 2 gen preceding me was about me and mine, but sleeping ok with their future very much in my remaining neurons..

Since you wrote a serious response, and desired some corroboration of the Las Vegas story, check this out. Hopefully, some here will entertain the information therein, since it appeared in the NY Times. Some people consider them an important news source, (not me).

So your source is a scare-mongering anonymous blog? Wow, that’s REAL news right there…

Any clown need not click on this link. Its only for those who have at least heard someone talk about the NY times, Columbia Broadcasting System, Associated Press, etc.

But the video is fun to watch. No wonder it got a rise out of some passersby.

Someday, a grandparent will sit his grandchildren down and tell them the story of how Toyota’s attempt to promote “fool cell” cars resulted in a rapidly widening chasm between the claims in Toyota’s ad campaign, and the reality of how difficult and inconvenient it was to actually use one of them.

The kids will say “Ah, come on, Grandpa, you’re just making that up!”

example: If, somehow, the Japanese guv’m’t makes some statement that completely pisses of Any oil producer, said producer can make things Very difficult for the island nation, up to and including refusing to supply FF products. Japan has proactively seen that as an unacceptable weakness and are pursuing a remedy. In the process, other nations said, “hey, that could happen to us too, look what they did in the 70s” and are also looking to H2 as solution to that dependence. I apologize for the cliche` but forest and trees comes Readily to mind as the minutia gets uselessly bantered and repeated RE FCEV. Prior to EV1, electric vehicles were treated as a joke Nearly universally, who would want one of those. I cannot foresee a time where a pure FC like Murray will be an attractive option, as I believe that electricity is as important to modern civ as water and food. But a PFCEV sounds damned attractive as we gather the Huge volumes of H2 necessary to say “Oil for transportation? ONLY if it is cheap and clean enough, we’re good, thanks!” and remove that critical lynchpin held in unfriendly areas of the planet. Wind is by far… Read more »

Pupu, man what a clown you are… Both former Japanese prime ministers are now dead set against nuclear power and dead set against building any new ones.. I haven’t seen them “Foam at the mouth”.

Actually, the current Prime minister, Abe, may actually be in trouble. He doesn’t foam, but he does apparently have to find a washroom every 5 minutes.

Any one with that kind of trouble won’t be in office for that much longer.

All I can say is that I don’t believe anything the Japanese say about Fukishima, nor anything the Russians say about Chernobyl. Both cities are dead, the workers they sent in to ‘clean up’ are mostly dead or dying.

Long story short, fuel cell vehicles only make sense if there were no electricity infrastructure, but there is, so they don’t make sense.

If you were going to make a journey of epic duration where there is no infrastructure, and you don’t want to drag a cord, then fuel cells make perfect sense. Which is why NASA uses them on space craft.

It’s funny, EV advocates bashing FCEV manufacturers FOR providing hydrogen fueling stations when FOR YEARS EV advocates have bashed EV manufacturers for NOT providing charging stations.