You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
3 points

Toyota never fought against EVs. They were part of a consortium of companies (including literally every other manufacturer selling cars in the US) that fought against the mandates banning them from selling anything but EVs.

Toyota was first to electrify their vehicles with the Prius all the way back in the 90s and have hybrid options for nearly every vehicle in their fleet now, along with heavily investing in solid state battery research and hydrogen powered vehicles, so I don’t understand why people make stupid claims like saying they’re in bed with the oil industry.

Toyota is the type of company that methodically designs their vehicles using proven technology rather than jumping head first into a market that’s rapidly developing and changing. It seems they’re waiting to see what works and what doesn’t to manufacture their first real EV (not the joint venture compliance car that is the BZ4X or whatever it’s called).

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Toyota had a head start with the Prius. But instead of embracing full electrification they’ve been pushing stupid shit like hybrids and even worse hydrogen vehicles. Full fledged EVs are far more feasible than a hydrogen car, but Toyota is still pushing them because it means it has an engine, and that’s what they’re comfortable with.

https://electrek.co/2023/10/30/why-is-toyota-anti-ev-it-lost-the-race-to-compete-ev-council/

https://www.citizen.org/news/years-of-anti-ev-policy-at-toyota-generates-shareholder-backlash/

https://www.teslarati.com/toyota-electric-vehicle-push-wasted-investment/

https://observer.com/2024/05/toyota-announce-carbon-neutral-engine-ev-strategy/

https://www.myeva.org/blog/why-the-eva-is-holding-toyota-accountable

The BZ4x is an awful vehicle that they’ve only pushed out to say they have an EV. The world would be better off without that absolute piece of shit of a car. The only reason that car exists is so Toyota can go to their share holders and say “see, this is why we need to keep hybrid cars around”

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

I’m on my phone so forgive the janky formatting.

How are hybrids and hydrogen stupid shit? I think you’re misunderstanding how the Mirai works as it doesn’t have an ICE engine but a fuel cell. It may not lead to anything, but what downside is there to test it out? It’s still a zero emission vehicle and is only sold in a couple states.

I looked through all those links and they make lots of claims but aren’t backing any of it up with actual evidence.

Electrek’s article: Why is Toyota so anti-EV?

Claim 1:

consistently lobbied against stricter emissions rules under Akio Toyoda’s leadership.

This was what I addressed above when I stated that this was a lobbying group that includes companies like Toyota, GM, Honda, Kia, Fiat/Chrysler, Nissan, Subaru and even battery companies like Panasonic. Their opposition here is to the proposed timelines of the mandates because we’re not ready and very little is being done outside of manufacturing the EVs themselves to prepare. No grid upgrades, no charging stations, no solutions for people in apartments and condos. Here are the statements made by Toyota’s NA executive that Electrek is using to make ridiculously biased claims such as “Toyota wants to kill more people with pollution”

“If we are to make dramatic progress in electrification, it will require overcoming tremendous challenges, including refueling infrastructure, battery availability, consumer acceptance, and affordability.”

while rivals have made aspirational statements, less than 2% of vehicles sold in the U.S. last year were battery electric. He will also note it took Toyota 20 years to sell more than 4 million U.S. gasoline-electric hybrid vehicles.”

Claim 2:

Although the long-time leader stepped down in January, the automaker’s anti-EV efforts continue.

The actual statements:

Right now, hybrid-electric vehicles are a better fit than BEVs for most consumers.”

BEVs make sense right now in places like Norway where most energy is renewable, and incomes are high,” adding, “But Australia is not Europe.”

All these statements sound pretty damned pragmatic and nobody pushing these “Toyota is anti-EV” claims seems to have an answer for any of the issues addressed.

Public Citizen.org claims:

Years of Anti-EV Policy at Toyota Generates Shareholder Backlash

Evidence: a simple statement from a Public Citizen employee on why Toyota should release more EVs. A big old nothingburger.

Teslarati claim: Toyota exec believes full-fledged EV push could be ‘wasted investment’

Actual statement:

Ogawa seems to believe that electric vehicle demand is not currently at a level that would match a full-fledged transitional effort from gas-powered and hybrid vehicles to electric cars. He explained this:

“…again, our starting point is what the customer demand should be. So, for example, 2030 regulations said the new-car market, more than half of ‘it should be BEV, but our current plan is like 30%.”

Ogawa also said that, despite the EPA reconsidering the EV regulations and potentially backtracking them slightly, it is likely a better idea from a business perspective to look at what customers want, which differs from what the agency wants:

“I know that EPA is now reconsidering what the regulation level should be…We are respecting the regulation, but more important is customer demand.”

More pragmatism. Look at the failures of companies like GM who wasted a ton of money developing shit like the Hummer EV while their real consumer EVs keep getting pulled from production due to issues.

The Observer article just outlines Toyotas attempt to release smaller more fuel efficient engines to supplement their hybrid vehicles. Again another attempt at an alternative to straight BEV vehicles but if it’s carbon neutral what’s the issue exactly? Are these journalists pushing for zero emissions or BEVs specifically? It sure seems like the latter and they never seem to account for the emissions related to generating the electricity to power BEVs. My state has mostly clean energy generation but too many states are still relying on coal and gas to generate power.

Lastly the EVA article, I won’t even bother to write much about this since none of their claims are even sourced and it’s written in a quite biased manner.

Nothing here is “Anti-EV” it’s just a bunch of zealots and self-serving individuals generating outrage and clickbait. Toyota thinks the deadlines (some as soon as 2030, 5 years from now) are too extreme and unachievable. Think of where we were in 2019 versus now and how little actual progress has been made in terms of infrastructure and markets hare. Do you honestly think in 5 more years it would be feasible to completely ban all ICE sales when EVs only make up 8 out of every 100 vehicles sold currently?

The politicians pushing these mandates have sat on their ass and done very little to actually push the country forward apart from some measly tax credit extensions. That’s like a 20-year-old claiming they’re going to be a millionaire by age 30 and proceeding to spend the next decade on their couch playing video games. It’s a lofty goal, but if they don’t actually do anything to achieve it, it ain’t gonna happen.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Meanwhile here in France, I see Teslas everywhere, lots of Zoes, some e208, and Toyota still has nothing to show except for the Pro Ace.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Did you even read my comment because I addressed this very point…

People seem so quick to parrot what they’ve read on social media but nobody can even make a coherent argument as to why Toyota would be against electrification when a majority of their vehicles are already halfway electrified and have been for far longer than most manufacturers. Stop spreading misinformation.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

When every manufacturer finally has several EVs on the market, Toyota will maybe have an eYaris or whatever. They should hurry up before sales of new ICE cars are banned.

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!world@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

  • Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:

    • Post news articles only
    • Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
    • Title must match the article headline
    • Not United States Internal News
    • Recent (Past 30 Days)
    • Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
  • Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think “Is this fair use?”, it probably isn’t. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.

  • Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.

  • Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.

  • Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19

  • Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

  • Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

  • Rule 7: We didn’t USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you’re posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Community stats

  • 10K

    Monthly active users

  • 8.8K

    Posts

  • 99K

    Comments