The greenest and most efficient car in the USA is NOT an EV
03-08-24, 11:35 AM
#61
Advanced
Thread Starter
Glad to see this report making the rounds of many news sources, including kelley's blue book, the washington post, etc..
It just goes to show that you need to look at the entire life cycle of the vehicle (not just the emissions when it's being used, but how it was made; how efficient it is - huge trucks made for one man personal use aren't good, like the EV Hummer; how long will it last; and what happens after it's not used to its parts) in order to determine how "green" it really is.
It just goes to show that you need to look at the entire life cycle of the vehicle (not just the emissions when it's being used, but how it was made; how efficient it is - huge trucks made for one man personal use aren't good, like the EV Hummer; how long will it last; and what happens after it's not used to its parts) in order to determine how "green" it really is.
03-08-24, 12:28 PM
#62
Lexus Champion
03-09-24, 11:29 AM
#63
Intermediate
This is quite interesting. No one will argue against the fact that a BEV will emit a lower CO2 footprint over its entire lifecycle compared to an ICE, hybrid, PHEV, etc. There have been enough studies, reports, etc to prove that out. Those are facts, and I think undisputed.
However, the goal here is to replace as many ICE cars as possible, and as fast as possible, so as to slow down growth of CO2 emissions at a faster rate. However, if the mass adoption of BEV's is bottlenecked by the availability of critical resources, then Toyota's argument is that for a given quantify of critical minerals, you are better off in the short term to replace 90 ICE cars with 90 hybrids as opposed to replacing only 1 ICE car with 1 BEV and still having to deal with another 89 ICE cars on the street.
Of course, the holy grail is to replace 100% of all ICE cars with 100% of BEVs, but that solution is severely hampered by the lack of critical minerals, long development time to produce them, infrastructure gaps, etc., which all stretch out the timeline to achieve this holy grail objective.
Of course, the counter argument to this is that this strategy may hamper the further development, investment, and acceleration of BEV's into the market.
However, the goal here is to replace as many ICE cars as possible, and as fast as possible, so as to slow down growth of CO2 emissions at a faster rate. However, if the mass adoption of BEV's is bottlenecked by the availability of critical resources, then Toyota's argument is that for a given quantify of critical minerals, you are better off in the short term to replace 90 ICE cars with 90 hybrids as opposed to replacing only 1 ICE car with 1 BEV and still having to deal with another 89 ICE cars on the street.
Of course, the holy grail is to replace 100% of all ICE cars with 100% of BEVs, but that solution is severely hampered by the lack of critical minerals, long development time to produce them, infrastructure gaps, etc., which all stretch out the timeline to achieve this holy grail objective.
Of course, the counter argument to this is that this strategy may hamper the further development, investment, and acceleration of BEV's into the market.
Last edited by TGPCanada; 03-09-24 at 12:24 PM.
03-09-24, 12:11 PM
#64
Lexus Champion
This is quite interesting. No one will argue against the fact that a BEV will emit a lower CO2 footprint over its entire lifecycle compared to an ICE, hybrid, PHEV, etc. There have been enough studies, reports, etc to prove that out. Those are facts, and I think undisputed.
However, the goal here is to replace as many ICE cars as possible, and as fast as possible, so as to slow down growth of CO2 emissions at a faster rate. However, if the mass adoption of BEV's is bottlenecked by the availability of critical resources, then Toyota's argument is that for a given quantify of critical minerals, you are better off in the short term to replace 60 ICE cars with 60 hybrids as opposed to replacing only 1 ICE car with 1 BEV and still having to deal with another 59 ICE cars on the street.
Of course, the holy grail is to replace 100% of all ICE cars with 100% of BEVs, but that solution is severely hampered by the lack of critical minerals, long development time to produce them, infrastructure gaps, etc., which all stretch out the timeline to achieve this holy grail objective.
Of course, the counter argument to this is that this strategy may hamper the further development, investment, and acceleration of BEV's into the market.
However, the goal here is to replace as many ICE cars as possible, and as fast as possible, so as to slow down growth of CO2 emissions at a faster rate. However, if the mass adoption of BEV's is bottlenecked by the availability of critical resources, then Toyota's argument is that for a given quantify of critical minerals, you are better off in the short term to replace 60 ICE cars with 60 hybrids as opposed to replacing only 1 ICE car with 1 BEV and still having to deal with another 59 ICE cars on the street.
Of course, the holy grail is to replace 100% of all ICE cars with 100% of BEVs, but that solution is severely hampered by the lack of critical minerals, long development time to produce them, infrastructure gaps, etc., which all stretch out the timeline to achieve this holy grail objective.
Of course, the counter argument to this is that this strategy may hamper the further development, investment, and acceleration of BEV's into the market.
As far as carbon emissions, many of us have stated that it's not why we moved to BEV'S. People like me did it for performance and driving dynamics, and the ability to "fuel" at home
The following users liked this post:
TGPCanada (03-09-24)
03-09-24, 12:53 PM
#65
Lexus Champion
I'm truly baffled how anyone could believe a hybrid is 37 times cleaner than a BEV. Even more unbelievable if that's possible is that infographic says a hybrid replaces the gas engine.
03-09-24, 01:09 PM
#66
Lexus Champion
03-09-24, 06:47 PM
#67
Intermediate
I think they are saying that, with the same quantity of critical mineral resources, you can either put on the street: A) 1 BEV and 89 ICEs or B) 90 Hybrids. And in this scenario, Option B will result in 37 times less CO2 output than Option A. So their argument is it is better to use those critical mineral resources to produce 90 hybrids (to replace 90 ICEs) instead of 1 BEV (to replace only 1 ICE) if you want to cause a faster CO2 reduction for the planet
03-09-24, 07:24 PM
#68
Lexus Champion
I think they are saying that, with the same quantity of critical mineral resources, you can either put on the street: A) 1 BEV and 89 ICEs or B) 90 Hybrids. And in this scenario, Option B will result in 37 times less CO2 output than Option A. So their argument is it is better to use those critical mineral resources to produce 90 hybrids (to replace 90 ICEs) instead of 1 BEV (to replace only 1 ICE) if you want to cause a faster CO2 reduction for the planet
03-09-24, 07:35 PM
#69
Advanced
Thread Starter
I've been driving a hybrid for 14 years now, and am new to plug-ins (just dipped my toe into the plugin market with a PHEV). I am quite liberal and am all for protecting the environment, but after reading more about the current situation, I'm very skeptical about any plans in the USA to move totally away from ICE in just a decade (or even worse, half a decade)..
I came to this conclusion after being bombarded earlier about how fast the BEV adoption rate was growing (as if they would soon swamp everything else), but then finding out plug-ins (PHEV+BEV) make up LESS THAN 1% of total currently registered vehicles in the USA (0.86%)! And this at a time when the rate of growth of new cars that are BEV is ALREADY slowing down!
Add in all the logistical, political, cultural, and economic headwinds against it, and I think it will take much much longer to remove all pure ICE cars from the roads in the USA...perhaps even generational time.
I came to this conclusion after being bombarded earlier about how fast the BEV adoption rate was growing (as if they would soon swamp everything else), but then finding out plug-ins (PHEV+BEV) make up LESS THAN 1% of total currently registered vehicles in the USA (0.86%)! And this at a time when the rate of growth of new cars that are BEV is ALREADY slowing down!
Add in all the logistical, political, cultural, and economic headwinds against it, and I think it will take much much longer to remove all pure ICE cars from the roads in the USA...perhaps even generational time.
Last edited by asj2024; 03-09-24 at 07:42 PM.
03-09-24, 07:46 PM
#70
Advanced
Thread Starter
They did not release the raw data crunched, but here are more summary articles on why Toyota thinks that way:
https://energyminute.ca/news/toyotas-1690-rule-the-case-for-hybrids/
https://autos.yahoo.com/why-toyota-isnt-rushing-sell-154000759.html
Do we have data or analysis that would refute this?
Last edited by asj2024; 03-09-24 at 07:51 PM.
03-09-24, 08:01 PM
#71
Lexus Champion
I think they are saying that, with the same quantity of critical mineral resources, you can either put on the street: A) 1 BEV and 89 ICEs or B) 90 Hybrids. And in this scenario, Option B will result in 37 times less CO2 output than Option A. So their argument is it is better to use those critical mineral resources to produce 90 hybrids (to replace 90 ICEs) instead of 1 BEV (to replace only 1 ICE) if you want to cause a faster CO2 reduction for the planet
03-09-24, 08:36 PM
#72
Lexus Champion
With all due respect, your reply makes no sense.
They did not release the raw data crunched, but here are more summary articles on why Toyota thinks that way:
https://energyminute.ca/news/toyotas-1690-rule-the-case-for-hybrids/
https://autos.yahoo.com/why-toyota-isnt-rushing-sell-154000759.html
Do we have data or analysis that would refute this?
They did not release the raw data crunched, but here are more summary articles on why Toyota thinks that way:
https://energyminute.ca/news/toyotas-1690-rule-the-case-for-hybrids/
https://autos.yahoo.com/why-toyota-isnt-rushing-sell-154000759.html
Do we have data or analysis that would refute this?
That being said, if I was Toyota/Lexus I would continue to double down on hybrids and PHEV'S, as they still sell extremely well. But ultimately I believe if they had a decent BEV, it would outsell their hybrids, as Tesla conquest sales shows a decent percentage of their customers are coming from Toyota and Lexus
03-09-24, 08:52 PM
#73
Lexus Champion
Toyota must be laughing themselves silly realizing they tricked people into thinking adding a tiny battery to a gas car makes it 37 times cleaner than an EV.
03-09-24, 09:29 PM
#74
Lexus Test Driver
Just an idea to throw out there.
Maybe Toyota will wait on mass producing EVs until they can make money at it.
The hybrids sell out from what peeps on here say so they have a good market of guaranteed sales with margin, at least I'm guessing they do.
Maybe Toyota will wait on mass producing EVs until they can make money at it.
The hybrids sell out from what peeps on here say so they have a good market of guaranteed sales with margin, at least I'm guessing they do.
03-09-24, 10:19 PM
#75
Lexus Champion
Why would Toyota sell a car with 37 times worse emissions?