Mercedes-Benz to invest €1B in Rastatt plant for production of next-gen compact cars
California greenhouse gas inventory shows state is tracking to achieve 2020 AB 32 target

Toyota Mirai fuel cell rated with EPA-estimated 67 mpge

The new Toyota Mirai hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicle (earlier post) will offer an EPA-estimated 67 miles per gallon equivalent (mpge) city/highway/combined when it hits dealerships in California this fall, and an EPA-estimated driving range rating of 312 miles (502 km) on a single fill of hydrogen.

Toyota North America CEO Jim Lentz announced the EPA-estimated performance figures at the Aspen Ideas Festival in Aspen, Colorado. Mirai is the only electric vehicle on the market that tops the 300-mile (483 km) range milestone. (The Tesla Model S offers up to 270 miles.)

The Toyota Mirai is a four-door, mid-size sedan with performance that fully competes with traditional internal combustion engines. In addition to its range range and fuel economy, Mirai offers a comprehensive ownership experience:

  • Three years’ worth of complimentary fuel

  • Three years complimentary Safety Connect and Entune, including hydrogen station finder app

  • Three years of 24/7 customer call support.

  • Mirai Complimentary Rental Experience for seven days per year for three years.

  • ToyotaCare, the standard no-cost service plan and roadside assistance, is enhanced for Mirai and offers no-cost scheduled maintenance for three years, or 35,000 miles, whichever comes first; and no-cost enhanced roadside assistance for three years, regardless of mileage, including expedited towing service and trip interruption reimbursement at a maximum of $500 per day for up to 5 days per incident.

  • 8-year/100,000-mile warranty on key fuel cell vehicle components including the FC stack and power control unit; FC hydrogen tanks; hybrid battery pack and ECU; FC air compressor, boost converter and ECU; hybrid control module (power management control module); and hydrogen fueling ECU.

Beginning this summer, California customers can request a Mirai by visiting www.toyota.com/mirai.

Comments

electric-car-insider.com

> Three years’ worth of complimentary fuel

At what point do customers find out how much H2 fuel will cost after the first three years? I really wouldn't want to buy a Mirai and find out at the end of year three that Hydrogen costs $13.59 per kg.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/has-the-time-finally-come-for-california-s-hydrogen-highway/

> hydrogen station finder app

I have to admit that made me chuckle. The US Department of Energy lists 12 publicly available H2 fuel stations in the United States.

Larzen

The Mirai rivals the beauty of the Pontiac Aztek.

Account Deleted

Tesla's Model S 70D does 101 mpge combined with 101 city and 102 highway. That Tesla can also do 0 to 60 mph in 5.2 sec whereas the smaller Mirai does that in 10 to 15 sec and only 67mpge. Also for a car that has virtually no places to fuel 312 miles range is pathetic. The Tesla can fuel for free anywhere and it has unlimited mileage warranty on the battery whereas the Mira only get 100,000 miles. And the Mirai does not have a trunk instead it has bulky hydrogen tanks that better not blow up at the extremely high pressure they store the hydrogen. Who will buy it?

Davemart

Wow, that's a very decent range.
Many thought it would only get about the same as the Tesla.

With their 5kg tank that is 62.4miles gge.
Even after reforming and compression losses that is tremendously economical.

Next year's Honda is supposed to be around 100 km more than the Mirai on the tolerant Japanese cycle, so will be the range champ.

Davemart

Haters gonna hate.

This is the first time I have seen the owner of one website trolling the comments section on another one though.

Pretty sad, eci.

Peter_XX

Toyota Mirai
The fuel economy for my Ford Focus Econetic Estate is 3.4 l/100 km. This equals 69 mpg, albeit in "diesel equivalent" numbers. The corresponding level in gasoline equivalent numbers is 62 mpge. Levels for corresponding cars, such as VW Golf and Peugeot 308, are 71/64 and 74/66 mpgd/mpge. (One should consider that EU and US test cycles are different but to get a broad picture a direct comparison would do.) It is nice to see that a Toyota FCV can match diesel efficiency. On a well-to-wheel basis, an FCV is of course much “worse” than diesel fuel due to higher energy use in hydrogen production, distribution and re-fuelling. That is if we consider the main resource for hydrogen production, which currently is natural gas. Hydrogen produced from renewable sources could also be used for an FCV or in the production of diesel fuel (in fact, hydrogen is used in refineries for cracking and to remove sulphur in diesel fuel). I have not made a matching calculation on the efficiency in such cases but it could be an interesting comparison. Currently, renewable hydrogen is far too expensive to be considered in refineries, which most likely is also the case for hydrogen in FCVs. I suppose that even current (fossil) hydrogen cost is somewhat prohibitive.

Account Deleted

The 12 publicly available hydrogen stations for all of USA are heavily subsidized. In reality we don't have a price for hydrogen for fuel cell cars that is meaningful for comparison with gasoline or electricity. I expect it to be much more expensive than gasoline without subsidies for the hydrogen stations. This is just another show stopper for fuel cell vehicles. IMO the auto industry should instead focus on self-driving cars and BEVs. That is the future for that industry.

Davemart

Peter said:

'Currently, renewable hydrogen is far too expensive to be considered in refineries, which most likely is also the case for hydrogen in FCVs'

Hydrogen for transport is mandated to come from a third renewables in California, and there are ample supplies of landfill, sewage etc to enable that for many, many years before having to think about electrolysis and so on.

So currently wasted resources will be put to use.

Since it would not need transporting far and the technology of breaking down plant fibre is rapidly improving local biomass could fuel hydrogen stations throughout rural America, and also further refined to other fuels hopefully replace the vast amounts of oil agriculture uses for machinery etc with locally produced processed resources.

Biomass etc is rapidly closing in on the DOE's target of $4kg, although how competitive that is with NG at any given time depends on the swings in price of that commodity.

Most renewables and BEV cars themselves would hardly exist if it were not for mandates and subsidies, so there is nothing new there.

CO2 levels for reforming natural gas to hydrogen are normally calculated assuming NG also provides the process heat.

There are excellent opportunities in stations in many areas of the US to instead use solar thermal, as since the hydrogen is stored anyway it could be produced during the day for use 24/7.

Solar thermal since it does not need to change to electricity and back is of course much, much more efficient than pv solar.

As for Europe, the economics of renewable hydrogen from electrolysis of surplus wind and solar, notably in Germany, are totally different there due to the far higher price of natural gas:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1RknvSlILKDLh--TXt-5MaTGcy2wUoN7QQgDRxf6ik2U/edit?pli=1#gid=0

See tab: 'Renewable hydrogen'

The Germans who have a nationwide network of 900 NG stations and so have considerable experience of providing alternative fuelling infrastructure put the cost of individual hydrogen stations and the total infrastructure cost at similar levels to natural gas.

Many of those now moaning simultaneously about the inadequacy of the hydrogen infrastructure and the 'impossibility' of expanding it to adequate coverage previously predicted that the dozens already under construction would never be built, so with a track record like that perhaps they should quit whilst they are behind.

As for the bitching about the cost of subsidy for hydrogen stations:

'- PG&E on Monday proposed a $654 million program to build a large network of electric vehicle charging stations in northern and central California to make headway against the state's green energy goals, but utility customers would have to pay for it.

The utility proposed the plan to build 25,000 electric-vehicle chargers in its service territory as part of a filing with the state Public Utilities Commission. The state currently has only about 6,000 charging stations.'

http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_27493623/pg-e-floats-654-million-plan-increase-electricity

That's enough to top up the funds to create a heck of a lot of hydrogen stations, and way more than any current proposed level of subsidy for them.

To be clear I agree with providing subsidy for BEV charging points, but the whole of the BEV industry would not exist in any substantial form without subsidy.

What democracy is all about is putting up with measures you don't agree with as well as those you do.

We are left then with the proposition that random usually wholly unqualified in relevant disciplines bloggers know more than the DOE, than all the big car companies and all of their engineers, and on the back of their envelopes have infallibly worked out why fuel cells are not worth pursuing.

Of course, there is always the 'oil company conspiracy' idea to fall back on, so that the likes of Toyota who brought us the vehicle of choice or redneck hooners, the Prius, and who have zero financial stake in oil, have mysteriously been taken over by mind control from the oil companies so that they are spending billions on a technology they really know won't work.

If the oil company's mind control is that good, then resistance is pointless.

To be plain I have no idea whether BEVs or fuel cell cars will dominate, although the vast majority of motorists in the world without convenient access to a plug might have a preference.

I don't know, and I think those who fancy they have all the answers are deluded, and have an inflated sense of their powers.

Davemart

I made a long post setting out the current status of hydrogen and fuel cells, but it seems to have got eaten, so I will simply post this instead.

Around 1.5 volts are needed to commercially split water using solar energy.
Here is hypersolar:

August 2013 1 Volt:

http://fuelcellsworks.com/news/2013/08/20/hypersolar-moves-closer-to-low-cost-solar-hydrogen-water-splitting-by-reaching-the-1-0-volt-milestone/

December 2013 1.1 Volts:

http://fuelcellsworks.com/news/2013/12/10/hypersolar-moves-closer-to-achieving-low-cost-direct-solar-powered-hydrogen-production/

December 2014 1.25 Volts - above the theoretical minimum:

http://fuelcellsworks.com/news/2014/12/09/hypersolar-achieves-major-breakthrough-in-splitting-water-into-renewable-hydrogen-fuel/

Today, July 2015 1.4 Volts:

http://fuelcellsworks.com/news/2015/07/01/hypersolar-achieves-major-milestone-for-splitting-water-molecules-to-produce-renewable-hydrogen-fuel/

I think it is time some people took the battery only blinders off.

Davemart

@Peter:

My long post seems to have reappeared!

I don't mean that personally to you, as your post talking about the cost of hydrogen was just the starting point for what I wished to say, so only the bits directly answering that are addressed to you.

HarveyD

Picking up enough H2 for 300+ miles takes about 20X less time than recharging equivalent extended range BEVs. In principle, 20X less H2 station facilities would be required.

Assuming that H2 station facilities will cost 5X to 10X as much as quick charge EV facilities, the total thin network cost may be about the same or even less for H2?

Davemart

@Harvey:

Where they are not subsidised away from home chargers charge one heck of a lot for a few kilowatthours of power, and most at the prices they charge won't want to charge more than they have to.

Of course, there is the Tesla model, which supposedly charges including in the price of the car.
Aside from the fact that it is a bit difficult to allocate profits when the company is running at an ongoing loss, and that the monies paid in are in no way ring fenced or AFAIK a written contract offered guaranteeing how many chargers will be in the network, access to them, or anything else, that model is tough to do for cheaper cars at the sharp end of the market.

A PHEV FCEV as Audi have shown could simply charge at home when convenient, and at more or less conventional filling stations away from home.

Most estimates put the cost of infrastructure for BEVs and fuel cell cars at similar levels, and in any case small compared to the cost of the cars.

Fuel cell cars need fewer but more expensive equipment.

electric-car-insider.com

DM> Haters gonna hate.

No hate DaveMart, just mild amusement that Toyota touts a fuel station finder app for the 12 H2 stations available in the U.S. Eleven of those are unusable to someone living near the Connecticut or South Carolina stations. Ten of those are unusable to a FCV driver living the the San Francisco Bay Area. Only eight stations are relevant to someone in LA. Does that really require a zip code lookup?

No hate about the fact that FCV OEMs are making fuel dispensers sign non disclosure agreements about *the consumer price of H2 fuel* which Scientific American reports as $13.59 per kg at the new Sacramento station.

Maybe if the FCV OEMs give it away for the first three years consumers won't ask questions. For three years anyway. No hate. But a very healthy dose of skepticism about a practice which on its face seems deceptive and seems intended to hide a bigger truth about the viability of H2 as a transportation fuel.

No wonder Hyundai has so few takers on the Tucson FCV.

Davemart

ECI:

I thought you had a blog to run given over to immoderate and wholly unconsidered boosterism of Tesla.

It is surprising that you find the time to troll other sites and threads whenever hydrogen or fuel cells are mentioned, surprising and ill-mannered.

BTW, you have never mentioned whether you or your staff hold a financial interest in Tesla, but promote it on every occasion.

No doubt you will wish to clarify the matter, or not since you never give a straight answer.

HarveyD

BEVs and FCEVs will soon co-exist in Japan, Germany, So-Korea (and other places) together with thin first generation EV quick charge facilities (30+ minutes) and H2 stations (3 minutes).

Areas with long cold winters and clean Hydro-Wind electricity will benefit more from FCEVs but reduced extended range BEVs will still be an option. .

Areas with sunny hot weather and Solar energy will benefit more from BEVs but FCEVs will also be an option for many users.

electric-car-insider.com

It's a print magazine in national distribution on North America's largest newsstands actually, Davemart, but you already knew that. Don't miss any opportunity to take a personal dig, it's good sport, right?

No financial interest in Tesla other than owning a Model S, which is every bit as delightful to drive as anyone who owns one says it is.

I have noticed how infrequently you address the actual topic at hand, preferring personal attacks. It's tiresome, old man. Not that you'll be inclined to stop on my say so but do give it some thought. It just ruins your credibility, mate.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)