In The Guardian today.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/02/toyota-a…
No indication of price.
The best of all possible OZ B worlds - renewable and a Toyota.
Mod Note: Official Toyota News announcement
Toyota Announces Mass Production of EVs, Coming Soon to Oz
Lastchancetosee on 03/11/2021 - 08:15
Last edited 04/11/2021 - 00:04 by 1 other user
Last edited 04/11/2021 - 00:04 by 1 other user
Related Stores
Comments
*makes aeroplane sounds
*imitates plane mounted gun shooting
*imitates bomb drop whistle*Take that, Hitler!
*Take that, Gerry!
You accidentally wrote hitler twice.
sure he's a flog but he's not hitler bad…
As long as he puts Gerry in the same class!
What would you do if your aircraft only had 2 bullets and Hitler and Gerry were straight ahead?
I'd fire twice to make sure I get my primary target.
After that I'd come up with a plan for Hitler.
At least it's optional and comes with a steer by wire system, unlike the $100k+ Model S Plaid.
$100K+? Try 200K+
I mean if it's $200K then $100K+ is still technically correct.
@bajillionaire: This statement could've come from a real estate agent if you added another digit to the numbers.
I read the yoke is only on Chinese market models for now, its not approved (yet…) for the Australian or US models, and even when it is, its an optional upgrade, the round wheel is still standard.
Solar panels can be built into the roof for use while driving or when parked. Toyota says these panels will add an extra 1800km of driving distance each year
So if you only use it once a week to goto the shops you'll never need to charge it.
Not if you park in a garage
Just leave you lights on in the garage…
Problem solved…
What a bright idea
will be interesting to see if they've made consideration to the fact that Oz is one of the most hailstorm prone places in the world. With car panels being particularly fragile, who'd bear the brunt of repairs when a measurable amount break during a storm.
Its partly the reason why Aus-Spec cars dont receive panels when delivered here when available globally for the same model.
House roof ones are rated for hail and pass ball-bearing drop tests.
Should be able to do the same for cars, at least in theory.
in theory yes, and you're correct for houses but when it comes to cars it hasn't been perfected yet.
The overall panel system needs to be much thinner and lighter for automotive applications and to date its not been cost-effective to develop ones yet rated for hailstorms, esp. given we're a small market and one of the only ones with this problem so manufacturers just omit it when building ones for our market. I'm sure the tech will come along, and given the average cost of EV's right now the extra expense will probably be incorporated into the RRP@JDMcarfan: They make massive glass sunroofs for cars. It won’t take much to put some solar panels under one of them.
@JDMcarfan: The reason why solar panels are not available has nothing to do with hail storms.
It was not simply practical back then, even now, only marginally ok to top up an EV battery with today's technology.
Even bespoke NASA solar panels have an efficiency figure in mid-30s. Given the very limited area available on a passenger car roof (surface area)+ the relatively high capacity of EV batteries, it just did not make sense to charge batteries with integrated solar panels.Gen 3 Prius i-Tech had a solar panel for cabin ventilation during hot days, yes, the Australian version had them too.
@skillet: Won't be a problem if you live a long way from the coast or in much of Northern Australia.
We're really not anymore different than anywhere else in the world. A solar panel on the roof is no different than any sun/moon roof, it's still got to be crack/crash approved.
Anywhere in the tropics will be at least as prone to hailstorms as most of Australia.
Toyota is WAY behind the game on EVs, being outright non-believers in them until the last couple of years.
Still, their first EV model will naturally be sold where there is tremendous demand for and support for EVs (ie where they can fetch the biggest margins). So it will be years before we see a COST COMPETITIVE BEV from Toyota in Australia, if ever.
Middle East? Lots of sun, lots of demand for Toyota…
Still, their first EV model will naturally be sold where there is tremendous demand for and support for EVs (ie where they can fetch the biggest margins).
Not sure that makes sense. EVs have massive margins in Australia precisely because there's no serious government support and so lower market uptake. Places where they are more common the prices are going to be lower in order to compete with many other options.
E.g. look at the new Hyundai coming in with what amounts to an $80k price tag for a pretty modest electric SUV. The margin on that must be huge.
you'll be looking at 200W/ m2 in effective electricity, so really not a lot of additional charge, unless you have a really big surface…
The top of an electric car has maybe 3–5 square meters of flat space.
Solar panels, even at high noon, usually only produce about 200 watt-hours per square meter.
The most efficient production electric vehicles today (probably the Hyundai Ioniq and the Tesla Mod 3) would only be able to travel 2–4 miles on that amount of electricity…in an hour. Most people could walk faster.
Financially, the cost of the panels and electronics, R&D and assembly would never pay for itself in the life of the vehicle, compared to charging from the wall in your garage.
Yeah, it'd generate around 1kwh a day (which would line up with the 1800km a year, 5km a day which would be about 1kwh worth of juice), resulting in a saving of less than $100 a year. It'll be one for the greenies to crow over, not much else.
Granted, the electronics are mostly already there for it with the existing charging setup, it'd just trickle feed the battery. Not sure if it would help keep the car cooler though? Probably not much compared to just having a regular roof and a reflective colour.
Unless of course it's connected to a low energy cooling system to keep the car (slightly) cooler! One other potential idea that it could do is maintain the state of charge as most EVs with smart features have a daily drain % so this could very much stop that from being an issue while providing these features.
It'll be one for the greenies to crow over, not much else.
I love this attitude, like you think "greenies" just want to do token things instead of actually fixing environmental problem.
And there are plenty of use cases where 1,800km/year of free driving is pretty handy. This is Ozbargain, if that was the result of a coupon giving you 0.00001% off petrol people here would be saying how great it is…
@caitsith01: I'm a greenie, I don't even drive a car because I think it's the easiest way to cut down my carbon footprint (I walk/take public transport everywhere, with the occasional rental when I'm in the country. I wish more rental cars were electric though). You're putting words in my mouth, I never said all greenies and I certainly never said they only do token things. But this is there purely as a gimmick.
And it's not "free", it's an added extra. This is OzBargain, if you pay $2k for an extra that only saves you $100 a year you should be handing in your OzBargain card. Thus why I questioned the benefit purely from the KM benefit Toyota is pushing it as. If there's other benefits, then I'm all for it. But, unless this is very cheap, most people would be better off putting it towards solar panels on their house.
Don't know why you were downvoted. The calculations are correct and your point is valid. It would be handy if you were stuck without charge just 2km from a charging station and have a spare hour or two to let it charge itself. Or if you drive 5km to work and back every day and park in the sun for 8 hours per day at work. You're right it would never pay for itself in savings, but its usefulness is worth having. Do electric sunroofs pay for themselves? No, but they're still nice to have.
The calculations are correct and your point is valid. It would be handy if you were stuck without charge just 2km from a charging station and have a spare hour or two to let it charge itself. Or if you drive 5km to work and back every day and park in the sun for 8 hours per day at work.
Surely something like this is not all that uncommon? It's not the 2km in one hour thing, it's that if you charge your car all day then you are getting a free 10-20km range out of it. For a second car it might well just sit in the driveway keeping itself topped up a lot of the time.
How soon before our coal hugging feds impose taxes on EVs as per SA & Vic with 2.5c/km (making up for excise tax loses that they don't collect!!!!!).
Other countries offer a variety of tax incentives to buy into EV and support charging infrastructure. I was stunned to see how many EVs were on the roads in Norway when there in 2017. By all accounts, the numbers have increased substantially since.
Our Feds are lead by climate warming denialists.Scott Morrison enters the chat
qui?
Off topic but I 100% believe he will make a comment today about Cleo being found to deflect from the extra shitty job he's been doing lately.
That and the Melbourne Cup probably.
@Cheap Rich Guy: The higher the education level & the higher the IQ, the more likely the individual votes Greens.
Research's a b**ch, innit?
And the winner is…
And he just did, with his head lifted to the heavens like it was some miracle from God rather than the hard work of many people.
The clock strikes midnight Christmas day, you're woken by a sudden movement at the bottom of your bed. Before you could act, a hand is placed over your mouth. "Shhhh, shhh, don't be afraid voter, It's me ScoMo from marketing." Terrified, you whimper: What do you want?
I want to know if you've been a good boy or bad boy.
I've been a good boy, a good boy, I swear
Then tell me what this is as he took a black object from his sack of lies
It took you a moment in the dark to work out it is dead plant material that have been buried under ground for millions years before it was dug out to power the LNP and you shout It's coal and I'm not afraid of it
good boy, good boy. Now sleep and I'll see you in the Shire
You turn on the light and look out the window and see 9 V8's roaring down the street. You breathe a sigh of relief, the nightmare is over but little did you know, it only just started.
I'm willing to pay even 5c/KM if it proves the program is lucrative, profitable and viable if it accelerates the demise of those industries and they are transparent with the levies and taxes that contribute to infrastructure.
You seem to demand the Government does things but are unwilling to commit.
You seem to demand the Government does things but are unwilling to commit.
I'm willing to commit. It was the opportunistic tax raising by 2 states on the fraudulent claim that they were going to lose excise income that they don't collect that got up my nose. It was a sneaky tax hike without any basis, relying on uninformed tax payers.
A federal tax to replace petrol excise, earmarked for roads is highly likely in a geographically large country with a small population base, as EVs become more prevalent. Can easily be done by a surcharge added to charging station costs.Federally collected taxes are redistributed back to the states. It's no different to GST (federal) designed to replace stamp duty/levies (state), but those still exist because the GST hasn't been efficient at everything.
@plmko: IIRC, the Federal government originally tried to get the states to agree to abolish stamp duty when in return for GST revenue. The states never agreed to this. The Federal government introduced the GST in anyway, and some other taxes were abolished e.g. wholesale sales taxes and financial institutions taxes.
News article from 2005 with a bit of history:
Getting to the bottom of the GST
At 10c/km, it will generate $7 billion. https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/electric-vehicle-tax…
Meanwhile, fossil fuel subsidies are $47 billion https://theconversation.com/matt-canavan-says-australia-does…
orangetrain did the maths.
Vic and SA don't collect fuel excise, it's a Federal tax. EV tax is completely unjustified.
EV tax is completely unjustified.
Why?
It replaces a tax that isn't collected by the states. It would be justified if it was a Federal tax, even then, I think it's putting the cart before the horse to do it now.
@Zephyrus: But they aren't paying the federal tax, so are avoiding tax. It's only fair on other drivers that everyone pays.
@jv: But it's not fair that the states collect it and try to claim it makes up for excise charges that they also don't get.
The states don't lose a dollar between EV and petrol vehicles, the federal government does.
The states don't lose a dollar between EV and petrol vehicles
yes they do… less money gets spent by the fed gov on the states.
@jv: Its about incentivising people to drive EVs. I know we have a non-existant EV policy (and climate change policy in general) but taxing EVs seems both premature AND discourages people from buying them. To the detriment of our environment
Its about incentivising people to drive EVs.
Shouldn't be necessary.
Taxes need to be fair to everyone.
@jv: there's no such things as fair….
and if there was, people driving cars would pay a lot more due to its environmental impact
@jv: At current battery prices, EV owners are paying 10% GST on their "fuel" up-front. Batteries don't last forever, so they need to either replace the car or the battery at some point. The VIC Govt thought they would be clever by offering a limited rebate of that GST disguised as an EV-rebate, but then clawing it back over the life of the battery, which in regular driving would be recouped inside 6-7 years. But only the first x claimants get that rebate and then the rest get to pay 10% GST + the EV tax.
There's a similar situation in NZ. In NZ you need to declare how many kms your diesel vehicle has travelled or is expected to travel and then pay tax on that. If you get pulled over, they check on your odometer and if you are drastically out in what you've told the govt you get a massive fine + have to pay the make-up to get you back into line. But diesel is considered NZ's EV fuel as they never loaded up the excise tax like Oz does. In NZ diesel is cheaper than normal fuel, so on a cents/km basis it's way cheaper to run a diesel car than a petrol one….but then you have this manual attestation/tax system around the outside which then needs more taxpayer $$$ spent to staff a department to manage the whole mess.
EV owners are paying 10% GST on their "fuel" up-front.
Rest of the car owners pay fuel excise as well as GST, plus they pay GST on the fuel excise too…
I don't believe people should be excluded from road usage charges, particularly people who live in urban environments as EVs still contribute to wear and tear on the roadways and excluding people from paying for these costs only builds up a unrealistic expectation of cost free motoring. Although at this stage the fee should probably be more nominal (ie 0.5c/km) to encourage EVs, EVs are still far from as environmentally friendly as an Electric Multiple Unit train or tram.
The government could do a subsidy of 50c/km, cut fossil fuel subsidies and come out ahead.
Just a side note.
The majority of the wear and tear on our roads is caused by a combination of weathering and trucks.
Passenger cars have a minimal impact due to their low axle loads.To add some example numbers, damage to roads increases with the fourth power of axle weight, so a truck with a 9 tonne axle weight will do 10,000 times more road damage than a car with a 900 kg axle weight.
I don't believe people should be excluded from road usage charges, particularly people who live in urban environments as EVs still contribute to wear and tear on the roadways and excluding people from paying for these costs only builds up a unrealistic expectation of cost free motoring.
Long term that's reasonable, but right now we need to be transitioning as aggressively as possible away from fossil fuels. Not putting taxes on EVs in the short term is a very easy way to do this - it literally requires nothing of government other than to not levy a new tax. Once you get critical mass it would then be reasonable to bring in a very modest levy.
EVs make sense in Norway because the majority of their electricity is produced by hydro.
Look at the electricity generation mix in Australian states here https://www.energy.gov.au/data/electricity-generation
Only Tasmania has the majority of its electricity produced by hydro and other renewables (which include the burning of biomass and is quite controversial with regards to climate change issues). South Australia has decent wind power generation. Pretty much other states produce their electricity via fossil proportion of renewable energy use. All the other states produce the majority of their electricity via fossil fuel (good running energy production may be seen here https://www.sa.gov.au/topics/energy-and-environment/energy-s….
EVs don't make sense here in most states unless you charge your car during the day using an off grid solar power supply. Clean up the grid first before providing tax incentives for EV cars here…
In October, almost every day, SA produced 100% of its electricity from PV.
It was exporting to other states via the interconnectors to NSW and Vic.If EVs were being charged at work, during daylight hours, it could also provide a massive battery storage incase of an emergency.
Grid connected PV electricity helps reduce electricity generation that uses fossil fuel. Plugging an EV into grid connected PV during the day would then mean more fossil fuel would now have to be burnt to produce electricity for other consumption. There would be no benefit to the environment if EVs are plugged into any power point in Australia unless the power points are supplied by off grid solar.
With limited battery recharge cycles, I'd wouldn't want my EV to be used as battery storage for other consumption. The only energy storage that I can see of use for excess electricity from PV is pumped hydro.
@x d: Nothing will please the coal lovers.
Previously we had issues with peak load during the day because the coal stations couldn't keep up.
Now we've added a huge amount of generation to the day time the peak is now evenings and night.Moral of the story, there'll always be a peak load.
@Drakesy: Nope. I want non fossil based fuel. Aus needs to consider nuclear or increase its renewable energy first with pumped hydro to store excess energy.
Charging an EV from a grid powered by fossil fuels is still more efficient than burning fossil fuels inside a car. Now, if you changed your argument to how many EVs our grid can support, then there might be something.
https://www.drivezero.com.au/technology/electric-car-versus-…
This suggest otherwise. The article only looks at CO2 emission per km use. EVs do not perform as well as hybrids.
Admittedly the article was published in 2018 but I don't think the electricity production mix in the 3 eastern states have changed much in the last 3 yrs.
That's before taking into consideration of the GHG over the production cycle of the cars as well as the added costs to the consumer.
EDIT - Just plugged some data into the spreadsheet from GVG using the example of the Toyota Camry Hybrid vs a Tesla 3. The Camry will produce 104 g/CO2-e/km (grams of CO2 emitted per km travel) vs an average of 116 for the Tesla. The figures are worse for the Tesla if the Tesla were to be charged in Australia's 3 most populous states, with predominantly fossil based electricity generation.
@x d: Difference being that you can change the Tesla's performance by changing the power grid, whereas the hybrid will never improve.
@caitsith01: Currently how many Teslas are connected to off grid solar? I'd say the chance of that happening is minute given that off grid solar is only likely in remote places and Teslas re not likely to be bought by those who live there.
Funny that I got the negs and the post above got the positives when clearly I have shown that the comment of the EV connected to a grid is not more efficient than burning fossil fuels in a hybrid!!!
@x d: I'm not talking about off grid, I'm talking about the grid. I.e., we shift away from coal finally to renewables (which we will) and suddenly your Tesla is producing 0g per 100km CO2.
@caitsith01: Completely agree, which means that the government should not be subsidising EV purchases, but instead spend that money on accelerating the closure of fossil fuel electricity power plants and replacing them with renewables
@x d: While this won't even be worth comparing once the grid shifts to renewables, I'd still be extremely surprised if a power plant operating at scale is somehow less efficient than an internal combustion engine. From a common sense perspective, a coal plant doesn't worry about weight and scale so they can use catalysts, recycle waste heat via pumping water around, etc while an ICE doesn't get any of those luxuries since it needs to stay cheap per unit engine and light.
The article talks about CO2/kW but I'd need more variables fixed. Is the input fuel the same? Or does that ignore the energy used to refine/purify a specific mixture for cars? Maybe coal plants burn the less efficient compounds because they don't worry about energy density (weight of fuel doesn't matter much compared to cars) while the energy dense compounds are separated out and sold as petrol?
@quanticism: I am assuming that the article you are querying is the drivezero article that I highlighted.
You can follow the links in that article to https://www.greenvehicleguide.gov.au/
I sourced my comparisons of the Camry Hybrid and the Tesla 3 after looking through https://www.greenvehicleguide.gov.au/pages/Information/LifeC… and then using its useful excel worksheet calculator via here https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=https%3A%2…, plugging in data for the fuel economies of each car that can be found in the initial green vehicle guide page.
The calculations provided I assume have been produced by experts in the field and if anyone questions these formulas, I'd ask them to provide counter evidence.
The final question is if the electricity generation at the moment is balanced enough to provide for current power usage demands, what if you have a sudden increase in recharging requirement with additional EVs added into the fleet? Obviously the extra electricity demands now have to be produced by burning more fossil fuel, thus negating the environmental benefit of adding EVs as these EVs are now 100% charged by using fossil fuel. In this scenario, new EVs being added to the fleet are actually far more dirty than hybrids as the calculations will not be utilising the "159" average constant figure provided in the excel chart, but will be needing a far higher "Convert to g/CO2-e/km" constant figure in the "Using GVG supplied energy consumption number for vehicles, convert to Wh/km to g/CO2-e/km" calculation to be consistent with pure fossil fuel use in electricity production.
The only situation when new EVs would then be of environmental benefit would be when Australia's electrical production is completely provided by renewables, with spare capacity stored in pumped hydro. This situation exist in Norway, and in Tasmania (if its spare capacity is kept for its own use).
Please correct me if I am wrong…
@quanticism: Coal power plant is about 40% efficient, a combustion engine about 25%, roughly speaking
The power plant also doesn't release pollution in the middle of a populated city, and burns 'cleanly' - it will not be emitting NO2, SO2, which are more toxic/stronger greenhouse gases
@greatlamp: Combustion engine in hybrid forms have achieved 40% efficiency since 2015, with Toyota releasing its Dynamic Force non hybrid engines in 2018 with also 40% efficiency - https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/toyota-new-engine-record-…. I just ran across an article that has Nissan claiming 50% efficiency.
I do give that power plants don't release pollution in the middle of a populated city. However, can you provide a source of clean power plants in Australia? This, https://reneweconomy.com.au/clean-australias-clean-coal-powe… suggest that the majority of of coal power plants are not clean.
https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Sen… then shows that "The pollutants can travel long distances, so even though power stations are located outside cities they are contributing to major city pollution as well as having higher impacts on the local towns. This has been illustrated in Sydney where research by CSIRO and the Australian Nuclear Science Technology Organisation (ANSTO) showed that half of the sulphate particles at Richmond in western Sydney could be traced back to one of the coal-fired power stations despite these being located 70, 90 and 140 Km away."
https://www.envirojustice.org.au/coal-fired-power-stations-t… shows that "Coal-fired power stations remain the dominant source of Australia’s fine particle pollution PM2.5 (25% of the national ‘all sources’ total), oxides of nitrogen NOx (25%), and sulfur dioxide SO2 (49%) – some of the air pollutants most toxic to human health. " and "Coal-fired power stations in Australia are not required to fit best practice pollution controls mandated in most other countries that reduce toxic pollutants by more than 85 percent"
Whereas cars nowadays are fitted with catalytic converters as well as particulate filters to reduce most of the toxic gases that used to come from the exhaust of those cars.
why not do both at the same time? It'll take a long time for EVs to trickle down and become widespread
Sure do both. But I see a lot of posts complaining that Australia should incentivise the adoption of EV's when at the moment the money could be better spent on cleaning up the grid.
If you want an EV for the performance, or not wanting to go to the petrol stations, then do so. Those who do so should have enough funding to not need government assistance to make the jump.
I have grid connected solar, off street parking and live in the suburb, the perfect candidate to get an EV. The performance of a Tesla X 100D was appealing, but I wouldn't be complaining that there is no tax incentives for me to buy one if I did buy one.
@x d: government announced 250+ million on carbon capture. You seem to think by NOT spending money on EVs, we will put more effort into the grid. I say the other way is more likely. Once we have more EVs people will care more about the grid.
And its not about personal gain man….. tax incentives are for the betterment of the world. Australia is legit the only OECD country that doesn't have EV incentives. Does that not make you scratch your head?
Countries in South America are ahead of us! They are getting Electric fleets and buses among other things. And we are actually doing the opposite in some states via the EV tax! This drives me nuts man.
I actually did some market research in this field for a Charging Station company and it made me depressed to see how far behind we are
@creamandpaper: People will care more about the grid? You have got to be kidding…
Where are the EV buyers when the first generation vehicles were released. No one bought the Leaf etc…
It was only when Tesla produced vehicles that despite the cost had very good performance that EVs become popular. It's now that they are popular that buyers want government handouts for them, despite the questionable benefit to the environment in the medium term in Australia. So really, people only care about their wallet, otherwise they would have jumped on the bandwagon when the first generation EVs came out a number of years ago.
I agree that Norway has done the right thing with its electric car push however. In Australia for the medium term, I am not convinced that EVs should receive tax incentives just yet.
EVs don't make sense here in most states unless you charge your car during the day using an off grid solar power supply. Clean up the grid first before providing tax incentives for EV cars here…
It's not either/or. We need to simultaneously electrify everything possible, while shifting away from fossil fuels for mass electricity generation. We can, and must, do both things simultaneously.
Both SA & Vic treasurers should have been sent to Glasgow climate summit for castigation and public flogging
NSW announced upcoming taxes on EVs recently. All states will have them soon, it's a (profanity) joke. Taxing EV usage is logical, but they are doing it far too early, it's just squashing adoption.
Norway can fund stuff like this as they are busy selling oil and natural gas to everyone else.
Sensibly, they set up a sovereign wealth fund, investing a substantial part of resource income, to maintain/improve standard of living of their citizens, currently and when the resources are depleted.
We are the lowest first world country in % wise to have the lowest EVs, we're under 2%. Other countries are funding EVs but we're going the opposite.
Claiming "mass production" might be a bit of a stretch….. I don't see any numbers listed. Tesla is already pumping out million EVs a year and growing.
How many is Toyota planning to do?
7!
Sounds about right….
I expect they're planning on making more than your guess of 5040 per year.
Maybe more like 9! or possibly 10!
That yoke is a joke