I’ll believe it when I can buy it.
Isn’t this the same Toyota who were saying this year that electric only cars weren’t the future?
Those two things aren’t mutually exclusive though.
They use batteries in their hybrid tech, and if they can make money selling battery tech to other companies of course they are going to. It doesn’t mean they believe electric only is now the way forward.
But if you create a battery which basically fixes all the problems with electric cars then you’re going to go all in on it.
Yeah, but I think they were looking at hydrogen instead, which you can apparently burn in an internal combustion engine or use in a fuel cell.
Yes, but then they got a new CEO who is going all-in on electric and ditching hydrogen.
Lol accurate. FULL BRIDGE RECTIFIER
Before start anything: CHECK YOUR POWEROUTLETS IN YOUR HOTEL ROOM!
I think I might have heard something similar a year ago. Actually, I might have heard it every year for the past 10 years
Don’t buy it. I can’t believe the ongoing hype around electric cars. Just another layer of pollution on top. Drive less. Create walkable cities. Where is c/fuckcars btw?
I mean, it’s a smaller layer of pollution but I, too, would rather have mass transit and walkable cities
Well, there are scenarios where cars are the right choice - goods delivery, countryside with low density and small towns,… In that case, battery-powered electric cars could be the best option
I think this is where the right policies can mitigate the problem, build more rails transport infrastructure. Most countries that are heavily reliant on trucks and cars to transport their goods are usually ones where the government were and still are beholden to automobile or oil lobby groups.
Bullshit. Would public transport be better? Yeah. Are governments going to build public transport systems to get rid of cars in the next few years? Absolutely not.
Electric cars aren’t “just another layer of pollution on top.” They objectively pollute much less. They don’t come without a CO2 footprint, but it’s literally the next best thing to do to somehow reduce the carbon emissions while people are arguing over how to reduce traffic. Traffic is “just” about our quality of life but greenhouse gases are about the survival of humanity and arguing we shouldn’t reduce emissions of the latter because that doesn’t improve the former is like arguing that we shouldn’t try to stop bleeding out because that doesn’t also clean up the mess we made after shooting our leg.
Every time we change an old, working or repairable product for something newly produced we add a new layer of pollution, no matter what the infinite growth marketing crew wants you to believe.
I know. But older, broken cars are replaced. What is your suggestion for these? Why should any new cars that replace old ones still be running on fossil fuels? I’m not arguing that we should wreck all existing cars immediately, I’m arguing that those who are produced and bought anyway should be battery electric.
Dayum doesn’t California already have enough problems with its power grid?
Toyota is so far behind the industry in EVs that they have to release BS stories like this to make it seem like they are relevant. The proof is in the puding, and the only EV they have out right now has way too little range, costs way too much and has ridiculous charge speeds. It’s a 1/2-hearted effort, which is the case with all the Japanese brands.
I think they rested on their laurels for too long - the hybrids were so good, but they ran down that technology too far. Now they have to either do research into something else, which they’re behind on, or keep pushing and hope for a breakthrough.
Oh absolutely. Luckily for them, they have vast, vast resources which they can use to catch up, but that doesn’t happen overnight. The rest of the Japanese carmakers are in worse shape. Except for Nissan which jumped into EVs early on, but they never leverages their early tech.
