Toyota bets the farm on a hydrogen future
It was stunning news, even when released in the maelstrom that is the Volkswagen dieselgate scandal. Toyota has committed to reduce by 90 per cent the carbon dioxide emissions of its entire fleet of new cars — some 10.2 million per year or about 14 per cent of annual global production — by 2050.
Traditionally powered vehicles will represent but a sliver of its fleet — likely just large trucks and other specialty vehicles — while the rest will be replaced by hybrids and fuel cell- powered vehicles, said Toyota’s senior managing officer, Kiyotaka Ise.
“You may think 35 years is a long time,” Ise said, “but for an automaker to envision all combustion engines as gone is pretty extraordinary.”
Most interesting was that electric vehicles barely warranted a mention in Toyota’s announcement, the company seemingly committing to the fuel cell just as battery- powered electric vehicles are garnering media acceptance. It’s a huge commitment, because fuel cells barely warrant a footnote in the war on automotive emissions. In Japan last year, Toyota sold just 350 hydrogen- fuelled Mirai cars, a vehicle that only this month went on sale in the United States. And hybrids have been stuck at about three per cent of North American vehicle sales for the better part of the past decade.
Most interesting is that it puts Toyota on a collision course with media darling Elon Musk, Tesla’s chief executive labelling hydrogen- fuelled cars “a load of rubbish.”
What’s so very interesting about this seeming soap opera drama — Musk also labels the hydrogen- based technology “fool cells” — is that, while the average consumer thinks them radically different technologies, both battery- powered electric vehicles ( BEV) and fuel- cell electric vehicles ( FCEV) are, well — electric vehicles. Both are powered by electric motors, both are monitored by similar electronic control units and both promise zero tailpipe emissions. Indeed, the only difference between the two is how they store their electricity, BEVs using a battery — usually lithium ion — while the an FCEV’s “fool cell” runs on hydrogen.
The main difference in their performance, therefore, is not how they drive or what they emit but how — and, more importantly, where — you refuel them. BEVs, Tesla’s Supercharging stations notwithstanding, are designed to be recharged at home, usually at night. Although much is made of the need for a worldwide electric recharging infrastructure, many EV owners simply use their Leafs and i- MiEVs locally, seldom using the existing recharging infrastructure. Fuel- cell vehicles, on the other hand, will definitely need a large — and costly — refuelling infrastructure. The “gas” stations they will require mirror, to a large extent, the current gasoline- station framework, all the way from production facility to retail outlets.
That would seem a huge advantage for the Tesla model, were it not for the fact that, like a traditional car, fuel cells generally have a greater range than BEVs and, more importantly, can be replenished in the same five minutes or so that a conventional automobile can.
BEV advocates continually maintain such convenience is a non- issue — “who doesn’t want to stop every time they gas up?” being their constant refrain. Nonetheless, BEVs, Tesla’s headlinegenerating success notwithstanding, still account for less than a quarter of one per cent of the global new- car market.
Critics of fuel cells say hydrogen is difficult to store, the high pressures and cold temperatures putting stress on both the refuelling infrastructure and a car’s fuel tank. They also note that methane reforming — just one of the ways to produce hydrogen — pollutes just as much as conventional cars. And naysayers will contend that fuel- cell technology lags behind BEVs. Brooke Crothers in Forbes magazine this month said, “Tesla is about 35 years ahead” of Toyota’s ambitious goal of fleet- wide emissions reduction.
Nonetheless, Toyota is betting big time on fuel cells, hoping to sell as many as 30,000 a year by 2020, at which point it hopes to have cut its carbon dioxide emissions by 22 per cent. This will require an investment, says Toyota, of 500 billion yen ($ 5.5 billion), not to mention the investment that will be required by suppliers who, having already geared up for the expensive transition to BEVs, may now face yet another heavy investment.
With 35 years to completion and precious few details of the entire program released, it’s impossible to predict the future success of Toyota’s mission. Indeed, critics already note that, since hybrids are at least partly gasoline- powered, a 90 per cent reduction in CO2 emissions sounds practically impossible.
Of course, Toyota may be contemplating an all- electric hybrid, a combination of battery ( for low- cost, home- refuelled city use) and fuel cell ( offering convenient, quickly refuelled highway range) that no one has dared even dream about yet.