 |
|
EV WORLD EXCLUSIVE ARTICLE |
According to senior engineering executives, Toyota's plug-in Prius has been in development for three years. Utilizing paired 1.3 kWh NiHM battery packs, it has an electric-only range of about 7 km. While far short of GM's announced goal of a 40-mile range for its Volt concept car, Toyota notes that the dozen confirmed vehicles it is experimenting with are on the road, not the drawing board.
|
Special report from Toyota's Higashi Fuji proving grounds on the slopes of Mount Fuji.
Open Access Article Originally Published: October 25, 2007
Picture this. In the background is majestic Mount Fuji. In the foreground are six Priuses that represent the future of Toyota Motors and, most likely, the auto industry.
I and a handful of high-profile American automotive journalists are about to experience the ride of a lifetime: we're about to get behind the wheel of Toyota's internally developed plug-in hybrids.
For many of us who not only have been watching but also faming the flames for electric plug-in hybrids, it may seem that the big auto companies have only lately and reluctantly come to the dance. But as I am about to learn during our visit to Toyota's proving grounds, Japan's largest carmaker has been quietly experimenting with PHEV technology for much longer than many of us have imagined.
Our trip to Higashi Fuji started early in the morning with a 5 AM breakfast call, a walk to the near-by Tokyo central train station from which issues gleaming white bullet trains every few minutes and commuter trains every few seconds. As I am writing this, the trains are less than 100 meters from my 3rd floor room in the Four Seasons at Marunouchi. Gratefully, the sound proofing in the room is excellent.
Higashi Fuji is a one hour bullet train ride south of Tokyo, plus an hour-long bus ride that winds over narrow roads, through a string of Japanese towns and villages. Once at the Toyota proving grounds we must leave our cameras behind -- hence there are no photos of the plug-in Priuses we test drove or the FCHV (fuel cell hybrid vehicle) that was also on hand for us to experience.
After the pre-requisite company presentations, including a glitzy, but informative video, we piled onto a second bus -- thus insuring that no cameras would be present -- and wound our way through a maze of buildings and garages, eventually arriving at the center of one of the complex's two test tracks. There Toyota had set up two short driving courses, each adjacent to the other. The nearer course would be for the plug-in Prius drives, while the outer loop would be for the FCHV.
The company had set up a tent with folding chairs for the gathered journalists who report for the likes of the Wall Street Journal, Road and Track, LA Times, Edmunds, the New York Times... and of course EV World. But since the weather was fine and the six flower and bird-emblazoned Priuses beckoned, no one followed the script. Instead, we piled off the bus and made a bee-line to the neatly lined-up cars to check them over.
Apart from their curiously Zen-like applique of flowers morphing into birds atop pearlescent gray paint, the cars are your standard Japanese, right-hand drive models; albeit the computer display screen offers at least one new wrinkle that indicates one's driving performance in both EV and hybrid mode.
We had learned the previous day at Toyota City near Nagoya, that in order to experiment with the plug-in hybrid concept, company engineers had chosen to simply add a spare Prius NiMH battery to each vehicle, giving the car a total of 2.6 kWh of electric power capacity or enough to propel the car in electric-only mode between 6-7 km, an admittedly modest distance. Like the grassroots plug-in experimenters and converters in the U.S. and Europe, Toyota engineers also chose to locate the additional battery pack in the spare tire well below the rear cargo deck, a move that Toyota itself has criticized as being unsafe since it is outside the vehicle crush zone.
GO TO NEXT PAGE >>
|
| Times Article Viewed: 31847 |
|
|
|
Reader Comments
A valid email address and confirmation is required before your comment can be posted. Comments not confirmed within
24 hours are automatically deleted.
28 comments so far...
25-Nov-2008
65040
| |
Well thankfully Toyota is not the only one making green vehicles, last time I looked every car maker is making a Hybrid car plugin or not. Personally, I think the Toyota Prius is the sexiest since they have so many more styles than plain ol' hybrid.
Posted by: Hybrid Fan
|
|
25-Dec-2007
59719
| |
Just reading these very interesting comments. I notice that John still hasn't answered the questions
"Why could Toyota make the RAV4 EV ten tears ago with a range of 135 miles, but today claims to have trouble making a vhicle with a 7 mile range?"
and
"Why are large-format NiMH completely unavailable?"
Well John, what's your answer? I'm quite interested in hearing what you have to say.
Posted by: Peter Stern
|
|
29-Dec-2007
59759
| |
Peter, your guess is as good as mine. But let me tell my relatively uninformed views.
As to the first question, Toyota never intended the RAV4 EV to be a commercial product. My guess is that it cost them $100,000 or more to make each RAV4 EV. They dropped the program, just like GM did the EV1, when the legal requirement to put electric vehicles on the road was removed.
Toyota does not seem to consider the RAV4 EV a commercial product. On the other hand, Toyota seems to feel they need to make a plug-in hybrid a commercial product that can pay its own way.
As to the second question, large-format NiMH batteries are available. Electro Energy would love to sell some to anyone who is buying. As would Nilar.
At EVS-23 I priced Nilar's 10-module pack. It delivers 2.16 kWh and costs $2,750 retail. The 10-module pack looked like it was about 0.2 cubic meters in size, and weighed about 40 kilograms. Nilar claims it is good for more than 2,000 charge/discharge cycles. And anyone can buy them. But Nilar seems to have no buyers.
I know some people think that NiMH batteries should be available at much less than the current $1,000 plus per kWh. But that's what they cost. Nickel is expensive. And reliable, safe batteries are difficult, and thus costly, to make.
Posted by: john
|
|
31-Dec-2007
59776
| |
Toyota, GM, and all the major manufacturers reluctantly produced their EVs only because of California's Zero-Emission mandate. When the Bush administration came into office, they joined the lawsuit to stop California's Zero-Emission mandate, and were successful. All the major manufacturers immediately halted their EV programs because EVs and PHEVs are so reliable and long-lived that the technology would decimate long-term sales volume. Electric motors used in EVs have a rated lifespan of 100,000 hours (that's 136 years if you drive your car 2 hours a day). Electric motors cost less than internal combustion engines (ICEs). Electric motors are more powerful than ICEs--virtually ALL trains are propelled by electric motors (those diesel engines on freight-trains are simply turning electric generators). The ONLY legitimate cost-constraint on EVs and PHEVs is the cost of the batteries. Here is a great post by EVWORLD blogger Joseph Lado about the plummeting retail cost of NiMH batteries: http://www.evworld.com/blogs/index.cfm?page=blogentry&authorid=46&blogid=417&archive=1 Joseph has found NiMH batteries for $.42/Wh or $420/kWh. I bought an 8-pack of Energizer AA NiMH batteries for $14.97 at my local hardware store--that's $.62/Wh or $620/kWh retail. If Nilar and Electro Energy aren't selling many batteries--I have no idea whether they are or not (they appear to be marketing to defense contractors, in which cost is no constraint)--it's because they are charging too much. Electric scooter riders are simply assembling their own arrays of AA NiMH batteries for much lower cost per Watt-hour than Nilar and Electro Energy. If you look at Nilar and Electro Energy's NiMH packs, you'll notice they are simply fancy assemblies of small cells because large capacity NiMH batteries are prohibited by patent-controller Chevron/Cobasys's 2004 $30 Million lawsuit against Panasonic that restricts all licensees to only manufacturing small cells. Compare Panasonic's, now prohibited, 95Ah, 1140 Wh NiMH EV (the one in Toyota's RAV4 EV) battery to Nilar's tiny 9Ah, 216 Wh pack. To learn more about Chevron/Cobasys' lawsuit, read EVWORLD contributor Josh Landess' post: http://www.evworld.com/blogs/index.cfm?page=blogentry&authorid=51&blogid=104 Cheer up everyone, Chevron/Cobasys' patent control expires in 2015; that's only 7 years away. Then we can all have AFFORDABLE EVs and PHEVs. Happy New Year!
Posted by: Mark Seidler
|
|
01-Jan-2008
59788
| |
Mark, I agree with your sentiments about using electric motors in cars. But I disagree about batteries. I don't think NiMH batteries are as great as you think they are. Everybody wants to move to lithium ion because they are better than NiMH. Not because of Cobasys.
A lot of discussion about Cobasys and its litigation with Panasonic and Toyota is wrong. Nothing expires in 2015. Look at this SEC filing if you want to see the details. http://www.ovonic.com/PDFs/Financial_Reports/form_8k/8k_mbi_patent_infringe_settlement_7july04.pdf
Finally, both Electro Energy and Nilar make prismatic batteries, not small cylindrical batteries cobbled together. Neither has a patent problem because their batteries are bipolar.
Posted by: john
|
|
13-Jan-2008
59968
| |
John is apparently obsessed with spreading disinformation. We cannot dismiss the possibility that he is an industry PR shill; perhaps a Toyota employee. Here is an excerpt from John's link: "Under the terms of the settlement, ECD, Ovonic Battery, Cobasys and MEI, PEVE,
Toyota have entered into an agreement pursuant to which the parties have cross-licensed
current and future patents related to NiMH batteries filed through December 31, 2014" The reason the licensing agreement is valid through December 31, 2014, is because the patent expires on January 1, 2015. I wonder if John read his own link. The important point is that Chevron/Cobasys is sequestering a technology that can reduce the USA's dependency on foreign oil, and there are laws against this. I urge everyone to contact their Congressional representatives and urge them to hold committee hearings to investigate possible illegal activity by Chevron/Cobasys through their restrictive confidential licensing agreements. Here is an excerpt from Sherry Boschert's book, "Plug-in Hybrids: The Cars That Will Recharge America": "Perhaps most telling, Stanford Ovshinsky, the developer of the NiMH battery whose Ovonics company was consumed by ECD and then by Cobasys, said in a June 2006 [Economist] article that he had designed a radical improvement to the batteries that would be perfect for plug-in cars if only the company would let him proceed." Here is an excerpt from: http://electrifyingtimes.com/hurryupandwait.html The room was filled with prominent researchers and PhD electrochemists. At the end of one session, one of the Researchers turned to the back of the room and point blank, read a summary of the low cost materials used in the amorphous NiMH cells manufactured by Stanford's company, Ovonics. He then asked Stanford why his batteries were still prohibitively priced. Stanford didn't answer, but had his Ovonics company spokesman speak up. He said it was to recoup their investment and R&D. The room rustled, because everyone knew that they still were making a killing compared to the materials costs. The reason NiMH is so important is that it is a proven performer as I have repeatedly pointed out the 150,000 accumulated miles (and still going) of the original Panasonic 95Ah NiMH batteries in Southern California Edison's RAV4-EV fleet. One of the Industry's propaganda talking points is that the batteries just aren't there yet and they are too expensive. This is an obvious delaying tactic to perpetuate their much more profitable and short-lived ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) vehicles as long as possible. The Industry is desperately trying to deflect public attention from the proven performer (NiMH) to lithium because lithium IS more expensive and requires battery management systems. By the way, the Toyota Prius uses NiMH and the Ford Escape hybrid uses 250 NiMH D-cells BECAUSE they are proven performers. Lastly, here is a comparison of battery specs that I was able to find from vendors (better specs are probably out there): Lead-Acid: 52 lb/kWh; $170/kWh NiMH: 22.5 lb/kWh; $420/kWh Lithium: 18 lb/kWh; $1100/kWh EVs and PHEVs are more economical and environmental than ICE vehicles even if we use old-fashioned Lead-acid batteries which is why so many conversion businesses are popping up. Check out: http://leftcoastelectric.com/ http://www.lionev.com/ http://www.canev.com/ http://www.ampmobiles.com/ http://www.ev-america.com/ http://www.evparts.com
Posted by: Mark Seidler
|
|
23-Jan-2008
60114
| |
geez, some of you guys are real maroons, you know nothing about how a car is designed and what it costs to produce a hybrid or an ev with a long range reliable battery pack while keeping the vehicle retail price below $30K and in a package that the public will buy.
Posted by: henry h
|
|
26-Oct-2007
58895
| |
Glad to see that Toyota treats EVWorld's reporter as equal in prestige to those other guys. Way to go, Bill.
And interesting report. Despite the many smaller companies trying to push ahead of Toyota on electric vehicles, my bet is that Toyota or Honda will lead the way to the electric future.
Posted by: john
|
|
26-Oct-2007
58896
| |
One reader comment that expressed confidence that Toyota and Honda will lead into the electric
age is an example of blind loyalty to a brand name. The simple fact is that both Toyota and Honda obviously haven't any clear idea of where they're going. Toyota has made so many contradictory statements that the EV world, as I read it in the blogs, has come to the conclusion that most of what they say can't be trusted. Now yesterday comes statements from Honda that are almost unbelievably dumb - claims that plug-ins are inferior to conventional hybrids (you know, the kind that Honda makes) are transparently self-serving and totally insane. Now Toyota claims they have a plug-in on the road, while GM has one on the drawing boards. I would dispute their claim that they have one on the road - their Prius semi-plug-in is NOT ready for prime time and I will note that Toyota has made about 5 contradictory statements about when, which car and which battery will appear as a plug-in.
Everything from 2008, 2009, 2011 and "we aren't saying" and NiMH and li ion, and then "we aren't saying" and now they aren't saying the Prius will be a plug-in. I note that in contrast, GM knows which battery technology will power the VOLT and when and where the car will be built. In point of fact, it's Toyota that's on the drawing board and they obviously don't have the main ingredient - namely a practical battery. GM is beginning to test their battery packs - Toyota doesn't yet know what theirs will appear. Toyota and Honda are living off of past glories and can only be described as dysfunctional companies in the new electrified era. If they think they have problems competing with the VOLT (and the do),
imagine their hysteria when contemplating BYD's
Chinese version of the VOLT, priced at $19K with a 60 mile range and looks that make the Prius
seem not a viable alternative. The Chinese are poised to destroy the Japanese Asian hegemony
in future shock. I wouldn't bet a penny on Toyota or Honda's future - they are embedded in the glories of the past.
Posted by: kent beuchert
|
|
26-Oct-2007
58898
| |
I found Toyota's "progress" disappointing and pathetic. A 7 kM range is approaching worthless. And this after three years? It sounds like Toyota fears a viable plug in for some reason.
Posted by: Tom Street
|
|
26-Oct-2007
58901
| |
I have a hard time believing any of these 'journalists' took this ridiculous dog-and-pony show seriously.
Toyota produced the RAV4 EV ten years ago with a 135 mile range and they are still working fine. Professor Andrew Frank of UC Davis has built many PHEVs that all work great--IT'S NOT THAT HARD!
Toyota, GM, and all the major manufacturers are obviously tacitly colluding to delay PHEVs and EVs as long as possible because EVs will have a MILLION mile lifespan, decimating long term sales volume.
Chevron/Cobasys owns the NiMH patent rights and refuses to license or sell the high-capacity 95Ah batteries used in the RAV4 EVs and GM's EV1. This patent expires in 2015. We may have to wait until then for AFFORDABLE PHEVs and EVs.
Posted by: Mark Seidler
|
|
26-Oct-2007
58902
| |
I believe that Toyota will error on the side of being conservative and NOT release any information until there is no doubt it wil be successful. What appears to be them vacilating is in fact hints they already have it figured out. When they flip the switch to their new lineup of PHEV, it will take the globe by storm.
It would dishonorable for Toyota to release ANYTHING that would force a recall.
On the other hand, US automakers still put press before research - and logic. They want to create interest and demand on hype. Face it, how many cool and glitzy GM vehicle features still work after 5-10-15 years? How about the 8-6-4 engine system? How about the nightvision heads-up system? Forget about the early diesel fiasco.
Those designs were fluff and poorly engineered from the start. Those cars died on the design board before the first part was shipped.
The little 3 US automakers put out more fluff than substance. History has proven that clearly. I'll wait the the asian engineers to get it right because I (and THEY) don't want my next vehicle to be junk.
I fully respect Toyota's conservative approach.
Wonder why they are #1?
Posted by: Dave h
|
|
26-Oct-2007
58903
| |
With no other real car on the radar screen, the Plug-in Prius is still the most promising plug-in to be. Of course, 7 Km is not much but so was the Trojan horse in the fortress, a small difference with a huge outcome. As they say, they don’t have to rewrite the software to pass from NiMH to Lithium, so EV range progress can be quick. Toyota can go a long way with the same architecture, as long as they keep an eye on fuel flexibility. They should be ready for Lithium as NiMH replacement but also for Ethanol as gasoline replacement. Up to now GM and Ford, seem to have had an edge on that part of the eco-car.
Posted by: Patrick Leonard
|
|
26-Oct-2007
58906
| |
Interesting comments.
As to GM and the viability of its Volt concept car, I wouldn't bet on it. Look back on what Larry Burns and others said about the AUTOnomy and Hy-wire concept cars. Burns guaranteed that GM would produce it. They didn't.
Panasonic partners with Toyota to produce electric vehicle batteries. Panasonic and the other Japanese battery companies are the world leaders in both NiMH and lithium ion chemistries. You can bet that Toyota has access to the best battery technology in the world. Much better than GM, who is fishing in a pond filled with little fish.
I don't mean this comment as a criticism of GM. But they do talk big and produce little. I think that is what is happening with the Volt. Toyota and Honda, though, never produce anything less than what they promise. That's why I bet that they will deliver.
Posted by: john
|
|
26-Oct-2007
58907
| |
Hey guys,
Give Toyota a break. The reason the range is so small is because they need to protect those batteries for warranty issues. We are pretty rough on our PHEV packs and the general population won’t want a car whose battery/s has to be replaced every two to five years. So they are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Also, this way they can use the same car without reconfiguring assembly lines. So they are limited on how much weight they can add to the Prius.
As far as it being able to “Hack” a Prius to make it a PHEV, we don’t really hack it, or change the programming. We leave the Prius just as it is and parallel the PHEV pack to it from time to time. This way all of the same protections for the OEM battery are in place. In fact a PriusPlus conversion keeps the OEM battery in a more protected state. So bring on the 2009 and well add range to them.
Toyota, if you are listening, we are going to buy your products more if we can modify them more easily. This would protect you from battery warranty issues and make your cars more popular. If not we may find a better Plug-in alternative with some simple modifications elsewhere.
You have a wonderful product in the Prius. Keep them coming, but could you add hybrid minivans and tucks we can modify into PHEVs easily to the line up also? It is good for the environment and good for my wallet too.
James Philippi
PHEV owner
Houston, TX
Prusplus.org
Posted by: Jim Philippi
|
|
26-Oct-2007
58908
| |
Bill you are blessed. Keep asking Toyota and they will deliver. As JP points out the 10 year warrenty is an issue , yet required for all hybrids.
It's very hard to be patient. The conversions are even coming slowly. This is not simple. They have to work in cold -60 of the north as well as 120F in the south. If it was simple and cheap everyone would do it. Like PC's prices will come down, in time.
I believe Toyota can do it and will. I pray GM and FORD will also do it very soon. It makes a lot of sense.
Posted by: Jim Stack
|
|
26-Oct-2007
58909
| |
by the way JP's link looks like it should have been
www.priusplus.org
Posted by: jim stack
|
|
26-Oct-2007
58910
| |
Toyota knows that their batteries are good only if they're babied. Subjecting them to really serious load strains (is 70 miles per hour in ev mode a load strain?) likely turns them to crap, hence all the overload, discharge, and charge protection programs. That goes for most non-throwaway batteries. The devices using the lithium based batteries are the first to show real progress in stored battery power. Anything less for cars will require the battery weight to be half or more of the gross weight of the entire car. We need electrical storage devices that take abuse and neglect. Perhaps 'battery' isn't the right idea for storing electrical power.
Posted by: David Park
|
|
28-Oct-2007
58918
| |
David,
I don't know what you mean. My car uses NiMH, and they weigh one fourth the gross, not half.
The car does 80 mph, and we charge and discharge from completely full to completely empty without any undue concern. This is babying? And these batteries have a history of lasting well over 100,000 miles. My car is made by Toyota and drives in EV mode ALL the time.
Posted by: Robert Stelling
|
|
29-Oct-2007
58929
| |
for NiMH check our nilar
http://www.nilar.com/index.php?pageID=27&languageID=1
I've also hear cobasys is now working with GM again and the large format NiMH batteries are being used in the Saturn VUE hybrid and other GM vehicles. A plug-in Saturn hybrid is in the works.
Lithium is super but NiMH is also very good.
Posted by: jim stack
|
|
28-Oct-2007
58921
| |
Mark wrote: "Chevron/Cobasys owns the NiMH patent rights and refuses to license or sell the high-capacity 95Ah batteries used in the RAV4 EVs and GM's EV1. This patent expires in 2015. We may have to wait until then for AFFORDABLE PHEVs and EVs."
My question is: If this is stopping part of the car industry from developing cheaper and better batteries its really bad. I would like to read more about this and maybee if any good journalist would care to do a serious investigation it would be great!
Posted by: Paul Berg
|
|
28-Oct-2007
58927
| |
I'm interested in the quote:
"Chevron/Cobasys owns the NiMH patent rights and refuses to license or sell the high-capacity 95Ah batteries used in the RAV4 EVs and GM's EV1. This patent expires in 2015.
If that is the case, it would be a GOLDMINE for ANY investigative reporter. Can you imagine the spin about big carbon being laid out buying that type of technology in a public forum?
anyone wonder why US gasoline is still cheaper - given oil's current record price, than it was 6 months ago? insiders say big carbon got warned about gouging the US public by the capital hill buddies.
- another insider story.......
Posted by: joel j
|
|
29-Oct-2007
58936
| |
Most EV World readers appear to agree that there is some big Cobasys/Chevron conspiracy to keep NiMH batteries off the market. I don't. I've looked into it some. There's nothing there that I can see -- no vast conspiracy.
But it is an issue that keeps coming up. Bill Moore was thinking at one point of contacting Cobasys to do an interview. That would be welcome.
Posted by: john
|
|
30-Oct-2007
58948
| |
To read more about the Chevron/Cobasys legal campaign to sequester the 95Ah NimH battery read:
http://electrifyingtimes.com/hurryupandwait.html
Anyone who believes the propaganda from the major auto manufacturers that the battery technology just isn't ready MUST answer the following question: Why could Toyota make the RAV4 EV ten years ago with a range of 135 miles? Southern California Edison is leasing a fleet of over 200 of these RAV4 EVs and many of them have logged over 150,000 miles and are still going strong. Why don't the major manufacturers just use those batteries? The answer is that they are legally prohibited by Chevron/Cobasys. Also read: "Plugin Hybrids: The Cars that Will Recharge America" by Sherry Boschert.
www.sherryboschert.com Also read: "Internal Combustion: How Corporations and Governments Addicted the World to Oil and Derailed the Alternatives" by Edwin Black.
www.internalcombustionbook.com
Posted by: Mark Seidler
|
|
31-Oct-2007
58967
| |
For more info about Chevron/Cobasys' lawsuit and settlement with Panasonic read:
http://www.evworld.com/blogs/index.cfm?page=blogentry&authorid=51&blogid=104
This info is about 2 years old.
Posted by: Mark Seidler
|
|
31-Oct-2007
58973
| |
Mark, I've read all that conspiracy theory material that you cite. Much of the information is incorrect. Some of it is interesting. But overall, I find it unpersuasive.
Many people who post comments on EVWorld seem to like conspiracy theories. I remember a string of posts a year or so ago about the World Trade Center collapse being orchestrated by the US government. To me, that's ridiculous. To others, it's true.
I put this Chevron/Cobasys conspiracy theory in the same category. Believe it if you want to. I think it's ridiculous.
Posted by: john
|
|
01-Nov-2007
58983
| |
May it please the Court of Public Opinion to instruct the defendant, John, to answer the one simple question--the figurative elephant in the middle of the room as it were: Why could Toyota make the RAV4 EV ten tears ago with a range of 135 miles, but today claims to have trouble making a vhicle with a 7 mile range?
Posted by: Mark Seidler
|
|
03-Nov-2007
59006
| |
John, you sound like a broken record. You never answer one point, you just hide behind your cliché party line that the NiMH battery suppression fact, is just another conspiracy theory.
Don’t believe in conspiracies, try these:
GM & Oil Streetcar Conspiracy
Automakers Conspire to keep Canadian Vehicle Prices much higher than in US, in spite of the Canadian dollar being worth more
Enron energy traders caught conspiring to inflate energy prices
More on Power sellers conspiring to manipulate prices
Oil Companies conspiring to inflate fuel prices
Banks conspire to block Leasco corp from Chemical Bank takeover
The Iraq War Oil Seizure Conspiracy
The 1953 Iran coup d'état – Operation Ajax conspiracy led by British Petroleum
And John, please tell us, why do YOU think George “ I’d sell my soul for Oil ” Bush and Dick “ I’d trade American Lives for Oil “ Cheney conspired to invade Iraq?
And John, where are the large format NiMH batteries? I want some, where can I buy them?
Posted by: Warren Heath
|
|
|
|
|
