2007 Toyota Camry Le Sedan 4-door 3.5l V6 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Toyota's Bob Carter says far fewer stations needed in shift from gas to hydrogen

Toyota's Bob Carter has been talking about green cars for years, but it's only been recently that his comments have really caught widespread attention thanks to his disparaging remarks about electric vehicle supporters like Elon Musk and Carlos Ghosn and optimism about hydrogen. Speaking at the opening of the Chicago Auto Show this morning, Carter said that Toyota has claimed the "pole position on CAFE," thanks to its deep hybrid bench. The company's green car cred will continue to grow because of its upcoming hydrogen fuel cell car, due out next year. Carter is relentlessly optimistic: "I truly believe fuel cells will fundamentally change how we feel about transportation," he said. The reason, Carter said, is that a hydrogen infrastructure will be easier to install than people think. He referenced a study conducted by the University of California (which we've heard about before) that found that California would only need 68 hydrogen stations to refuel the roughly 10,000 H2 vehicles that Toyota hopes to sell in by 2016 or so. That's a lot more than the nine that exist today, but the state has already approved funding for 20 new stations by 2015 and then up to 100 by 2024. Then he said this: "If every vehicle in California ran on hydrogen, we could meet refueling logistics with only 15 percent of the nearly 10,000 gasoline stations currently operating in the state." "We could meet refueling logistics with only 15 percent of gasoline stations currently operating in CA" - Bob Carter This made us wonder: if the refueling time and range are roughly equivalent between hydrogen and gasoline – Toyota's hydrogen car is supposed to be able to go 300 miles on a five-minute fill-up - then why has the market decided that there should be 10,000 gas stations in California and why would 1,500 be sufficient for hydrogen? "If the locations are optimized," he said, "we don't need 10,000 stations." For example, at major intersections, instead of three gas stations, you'd really just need a single hydrogen one. "There are a lot of questions about the infrastructure, but it's coming. ... It's a hurdle that we've got to climb but it's not as steep as some may imagine." Toyota's Mike Michaels, the national manager, media and public affairs at Toyota Motor Sales, then stepped in to point out that there are gas stations closing and admitted that there might be too many gas stations in California.

Aging Prius, dropping gas prices putting hurt on hybrid, EV sales

"As Prius represents by far the biggest chunk of the hybrid marketplace, where Prius goes, the segment goes," - Ed Kim, Autopacific
Fuel prices in the US have been tumbling for the last several weeks, with the average price of a gallon of gas at $3.120 as of October 20, according to the US Energy Information Administration. That price reflects a serious recent drop from $3.299 on October 6. Reports have even suggested that those low numbers might not change for a little while, perhaps as long as years. While drivers certainly love paying less at the pump, the change may be hurting the market for more fuel-efficient models, including the Toyota Prius.

Scion was slain by Toyota, not the Great Recession

Scion didn't have to go down like this. Through the magic of hindsight and hubris, it's easier to see what went wrong. And what might have been. What the industry should understand is this: Scion wasn't a losing proposition from the get-go. Its death is due to negligence and apathy. This is more than just the failure of a sub-brand. It's the failure of a company to deliver new and compelling products over an extended period of time. Toyota will point to the Great Recession as the reason it hedged its bets and withdrew funding for new vehicles, instead of using that as an opportunity to redouble efforts. This was as good as a death warrant, although myopically no one realized it at the time. Sadly, GM's Saturn experiment was a road map for this exact form of failure. No one at Toyota seemed to think the Saturn experience was worth protecting their experimental brand from. Or they weren't heard. Brands live and die on product. Somehow, Scion convinced itself that its real success metric was a youthful demographic of buyers. It seems like this was used to gauge the overall health of the brand. Look at the aging and uncompetitive tC, which Scion proudly noted had a 29-year-old average buyer. That fails to take into account its lack of curb appeal and flagging sales. Who cares if the declining number of people buying your cars are younger? Toyota is going to kill the tC thirteen years [And two indifferent generations ... - Ed.] after it was introduced. In that time, Honda has come out with three entirely new generations of the Civic. Scion wasn't a losing proposition from the get-go. Its death is due to negligence and apathy. At launch, the brand could have gone a few different ways. The xB was plucky, interesting, and useful – a tough mix of ephemeral characteristics – but the xA didn't offer much except a thin veneer of self-consciously applied attitude. That's ok; it was cute. Enter the tC, which managed to combine sporty pretensions with decent cost. It took on the Civic Coupe in the contest for coolness, and usually managed to win. More importantly, an explicit brand value early on was a desire to avoid second generations of any of its models, promising a continually evolving and fresh lineup. At this point, the road splits. Down one lane lies the Scion that could have been. After a short but reasonable product lifecycle, it would have renewed the entire lineup.