That car and driver quote was from Jan of 2022, my guess is, toyota Will be offering a hybrid MY2025, we only have a few years to wait. A couple of months ago, one of toyota's top executives "let it slip" that they may even have solid states bats in cars Before 2025. Toyota faired better than most mfg's in the last couple of years, and in the fiscal year (toyota's fiscal year) ending in march their production was way up.
Toyota’s motor vehicle production increased by eight percent to reach rougly 8.16 million units in the fiscal year ended March 31, 2022.
I have zero reason to believe Toyota is engaging in BS, trying to "dupe" the industry, or effect market price. My belief is, they are shooting straight, they are Way ahead of the competition in the SolidState bat field. Unlike many others, they have been working on the solid State Battery for 30 years or more. Their number of patents and dedicated resources it solid. I guess we shall see is a couple of years.

 

I have heard that a few times.

 

I read a lot about solid state bats, as such I'm always interested in what has been said, what has been patented, when things were/weren't promised, etc. Can you tell me where you read where toyota promised to deliver something, MY Certain, and did not deliver? They have always seemed a bit conservative to me, under promise, over deliver, type philosophy. But this is so big, maybe there has been a change in leadership/company philosophy. Even if you can't find the exact article, if you could point me in the right direction, I don't mind doing the research. Thanks in advance.

 

I would reckon that more than a few members here have either had or are having a career where "the next best thing" was right over the horizon, but just out of reach. That is OK as that is the way technology advances. Most times it doesn't work, but on occasion it does...

I am grateful for your post, which was in response to my expression of thought and hope regarding the advancements just over the horizon, but just out of reach. Since retiring from the military I have strived to be an optimistic person and look at the half full glass. Although, I am a realist and see things for what they are. I am also a "see it to believe it" type of person, but also realize that "seeing is NOT always believing".

I am also grateful for the information and quote you shared! I have been saying for YEARS that we as a nation and species should develop hybrid vehicles first, before making the leap right into the deep end of the pool. Obviously the pool is the EV technology. Just in the last couple of years even companies like KIA and Hyundai have come out with 800v architecture in their EV's which dramatically reduces charge times, so the technology is advancing quite rapidly. I would take a 65 MPG AWD mid-size SUV over a 500 mile range AWD mid-size SUV every day of the week, but that is not what is the focus of our government or the automobile manufacturers.

I prefer to have a conversation with someone that has a different viewpoint than I do, even if it is the exact opposite. Albert Einstein said "When you stop learning you start dying". I don't claim to know the future or everything about anything and I welcome the opportunity to learn something from someone that has had a different path in life than I have. I don't get butthurt when someone says something contradictory to my statement and offer outlandish alternatives, I welcome these statements as I may in fact be wrong and most likely the statement can be a learning opportunity. I may also be right and learn something from that as well.

So, again I thank you for your time, well stated post and effort you took to share a bit of your life experience with me and the other readers of this sub-forum.

 

I appreciate your feedback and kind words. I’m no longer in the automotive world after I transitioned to a specialty more geared toward things that go up (depending which branch you were in, we have have crossed paths at some point)but I do keep a close tab on automotive efficiency research. Over the past three decades we have seen a few promising technologies come and go such as

-the GM EV 1, which was a whole can of worm that I won’t open here. But needless to say the battery tech was not quite there yet.

-first gen wider manufactured EVs like the first E RAV4 which again, the battery just wasn’t there yet

-the small displacement diesel, but everyone knew around 2010 or so when Europe start banning them that it was a dead end route, not to mentioned the various diesel gate scandals

-Lithium based EVs: we know where they are now and the challenges associated with sourcing the material and components, I won’t beat the dead horse here

i skipped quite a few steps I’m sure so please excuse the late afternoon lethargy of my memory

-finally the hybrids, which I think I am in agreement with you that in that it is my current bet especially for general light use transport as there is a lot of energy to be harvested from braking that is wasted heat in any pure ICE vehicle. I am a huge fan of the smaller and lighter Toyotas for commuter vehicles now that they are pushing 60-70 mpg and more with plug ins, is what I think is a good not throwing baby out with the bath water interim solution to minimize drastic increase in costs that impacts the blue collar workers the most.

do I want to see solid state battery getting it’s day in the sun? Sure. If it replaces the toxic lithium mining and processing, all the better. But increasing density and such is only part of the equation. The EVs are getting so big and heavy that it will take a few breakthroughs for battery based on a thin film to be able to propel a 5-6000 lb vehicle. Vehicle laws need to change to allow some dispensation for cars built for efficiency to not have to weigh as much as a 3/4 ton pickup just to pass all the ever more strict safety certifications.

when it is all said and done, my biggest concern is that we are at the end of affordable personal transportation as we know it if we allow the whole sale liquidation of gasoline based propulsion to happen before we even know what the replacement is. Those who have invested heavily into lithium mines and infrastructure now have a vested interest in protecting their investment. In 20 years instead of “who killed the EV”, will we be saying “who killed the solid state/sodium/graphite battery” while marveling that as late as 2019 one can go out and buy a Ford Focus new for 12K? I hope not, but as we all say, be careful what we wish for.

 

The first motor cars that were the most reliable were the electric ones. ICE cars circa 1910 were so unreliable that the driver needed to be a mechanic and able to do repairs on the road. Even in the 1960's cars that went 100,000 miles without major problems were rare. The Chrysler K cars of ther 1980's were notorious for having parts fall off in the road. And we have the Pinto drivers and Ford Crown Vic drivers that died in fires after a rear end collision or Firestone tires that exploded at high speeds on the Ford Explorer with too low a tire pressure recommended by Ford's people.

Fleet operators who have thousands of work trucks on the road appreciate that when a ICE powered vehicle is in the shop for maintenance or repairs a large part of the cost is from having the vehicle out of service. They have also been dealing with a shortage of diesel mechanics for years and this has compounded the problem. Far less knowledge and skill is needed to replace a motor or a sensor on an EV and they are inherently more reliable than an ICE vehicle.

It really comes down to politics with the oil industry not wanting to leave the public trough and energy monopoly that has made their owners and managers very very rich. With capitalism it is not efficiency that wins out put money. Making a trip and flying across the USA in a jet plane takes just as long today as it did 50 years ago. For a trip from San Jose to Los Angeles the time in the air on a jet is a litle over 1.5 hours, but to that I need to add the 1.5 hours to drive to the airport, the 40 minutes to park and get a shuttle bus to the terminal, the two hour advance to check my luggage, and hour to get through the security line and get to the departure gate, 30 minutes on landing to get to the luggage carousel and the 30 minutes to get my checked luggage, the 40 minutes to get a rental car and drive out of the airport. Overall that amounts to 8 hours to travel 350 miles by plane. I can drive that 350 miles in less time and no issues with what I take with me in the car.

If I was living in Europe or China then I would have the option of taking a 200 mph train and it would take less than 2 hours to make the trip, and again no issues as to what I can take on the train. The auto and oil companies have been very successful at getting their politicians to reduce funding for train service year after year and force people in to buying and maintain their cars and trucks and paying for public roads and public parking. Only in the USA are people forced to pay the high costs (more than $10,000 per year per vehicle) with no alternatives for travel.

 

Here's a reason if they dont and push come to shove we the tax payer will probably bail them out so yes they will be successful

 

It is obvious by your post, you haven't been to china, and have spent little if any time in europe. Your presentation of the trains in both places may lead someone to believe every town is serviced by high-speed rail, nothing could be further from the truth. China has almost 200 cities serviced by high speed rail-200, BTW the average speed from start to stop on a chinese "high speed rail" is NOT 200mph, some may reach speeds as high as 240, but most average, from stop to start around 100 mph. EU's high-speed trains, require a reservation, sometimes months in advance, If anyone actually takes a moment to look-up a map of Europe's high-speed rail (overlay) they will be able to see, instantly, there is NOT anywhere near complete coverage, or even 10% coverage! Your presentation is such that, if you wanted to go to another town, you'd just go to the train station and hop on a High-Speed train, one leaving every hour I guess, and it will haul you at 200 MPH. They can't do that in the EU, they Can't do that in china, even in Japan, the bullet trains have limited rail lines. You also have failed to point out-the trains in EU are not privately owned companies, they are Govt owned. I worry about anyone that wants the Govt to own the businesses in the USA along with having some un-elected bureaucrats running things-does sound like the type of thing that has been popular in some parts of Europe over the years-Russia comes to mind, and germany in the 1930, along with Italy (same time period). I worry about anyone that thinks china is the answer to anything, a virtual model of goodness, this is scary to hear.

 

everyone who wants to uproot the current American transportation paradigm to emulate China needs to become a Chinese citizen and own a home in the area of construction to understand what they are asking.

 

On that note... GM is on track to be awarded a "conditional loan" of $2,500,000,000 to develop battery plants in a joint venture with LG. Does GM still stand for Gubment Motors?

My opinion is that the product should be designed, developed and implemented to a point that people want to buy it instead of it being propped up as something we need to or should buy. This goes for everything commercially available.

 

That Sir is toooooo much like Free Market America, there are those wanting to adopt the CCP model, or the soviet model, etc. We must ask ourselves, why is Toyota and Panasonic spending $16,000,000,000 on new battery plants, billions of dollars on a plant in NC, ford and bmw are now working together to develop a SS battery, but GM wants the U.S. taxpayer to foot the bill for gm and a non-US company. Answer, once they got on the taxpayer doll, they, like so many people, never get off.