Toyota to spend $13.6bn on battery development in effort to win electric battle

https://www.ft.com/content/45ac2c2a-f614-4ca0-9f1b-36bc1f66b837

by mardiyah • 5 years ago

35 19 5 years ago

ft.com

ximeng• 5 years ago

https://archive.is/iMh1A

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28459727 Previously

7thaccount• 5 years ago

Hydrogen not going well?

dimitar• 5 years ago

From TA: "the company has consistently argued that a longer-term fix for global warming should be a mix of hybrids, EVs and hydrogen-powered vehicles instead of a single bet on battery-powered cars."

I think this is probably a good call if they want to play the long game. Some places will simply fail to create the infrastructure for EV and that's where hybrids come in the short run. EVs will take off and hydrogen is in theory superior to batteries for range and space, has a huge potential they probably don't want to miss out.

thehappypm2• 5 years ago

Hydrogen has a much bigger hurdle: infrastructure. EVs need the same power lines that every country uses. Hydrogen (and natural gas, and oil, for that matter) require a second parallel set of infrastructure. That makes a big difference as far as appeal. If I'm India, I'd rather have a beefier electrical system than maintain an electrical system AND a hydrogen pipeline system.

hkarthik• 5 years ago

It's unclear if hydrogen had serious R&D problems, or just the go to market approach for hydrogen cars was flawed.

Hydrogen needed a Tesla-like company to strip away everything that made a car a car, and rip away all the legacy at once.

Getting away from ICE requires starting from the ground up, and avoiding picking up too much legacy auto baggage along the way. This is exceedingly hard to do.

Toyota branding their vehicles as hydrogen with the Toyota logo and trying to go it alone was sort of doomed to failure. They had no opportunity to build a buggy v0 of these vehicles with something novel and exciting to entire new customers because they had to convert the average Toyota consumer. They had to utilize the existing dealer network (and get them to buy in), and simultaneously work with governments to build up the infrastructure and work through government approvals.

I see a few of these Mirai's hanging around in California but nothing compared to the number of Model S, Model Y, and Model 3 that I see at every 4 way stop.

WorldMaker2• 5 years ago

There was a Tesla-like company that stripped everything away only to discover that Hydrogen is not economically viable for cars: Tesla. I don't know how much of the original "manifesto" documents of Tesla survive at this point post-Musk's takeover, but they were very public early on about pointing out Hydrogen as a huge red herring that traditional car companies threw way too much R&D money at and treated as a sunk cost to recuperate, and that was most clearly a direct "subtweet" of Toyota. Stripping a hydrogen car all the way down: In addition to an expensive to build fuel cell and an expensive to maintain "tank" for liquid hydrogen, you've got an electric motor and a need for a large battery. Why carry around the weight of an expensive fuel cell and an expensive to maintain "tank" when you've already got the ingredients for an okay BEV (electric motor, large battery)? Everyone without the sunk costs of say Toyota's massive multi-decade R&D effort should look at that on paper as a massive red herring and that you should just optimize your weight distribution for a better/higher density battery rather than waste weight/space on expensive fuel cells and tanks.

panick212• 5 years ago

Hydrogen needed a Tesla-like company to strip away everything that made a car a car, and rip away all the legacy at once.

That would not have worked. Because a startup could never finance a hydrogen infrastructure like Tesla did for charging. Its simply 10-100x more expensive to do and not practical or green.

Even Toyota and co haven't managed hydrogen infrastructure even in Japan where they had a policy and have been going at it for decade.

Beyond that building the cars is insanely complex, expensive and hard to automate. Fuel-cell mass production is and was even less mature that then battery mass production.

The reason there is not Tesla for Hydrogen because a Tesla for Hydrogen was not actually a practical thing.

Musk himself laughed at a reporter who asked him in 2013 and called them 'fool cells', point out that discussions was not worth it, and the next 5-10 years would clearly show it.

jimrandomh• 5 years ago

Hydrogen as an automotive fuel is not, and was not ever, a viable technology. This isn't something that's necessarily obvious to laypeople, but it is something that should be (and should always have been) obvious to the top engineers and executives at car companies.

_hilro• 5 years ago

I sense a big payday coming up for US politicians.

panick212• 5 years ago

To win in electric battle you actually need electric cars.

Magical new battery technology will not suddenly mean that you end up winning. Their claims about solid state have been repeatably delayed and a commercial product isn't close, and even if they did bring it out, it would be years before any real numbers were produced and even then it would likely not be competitive for the cheap and mid priced cars anytime soon.

Toyota is living very dangerously right now.

Toyota to spend $13.6bn on battery development in effort to win electric battle

Related Stories