I will admit I'm pretty ignorant on this stuff. What is the Toyota propaganda?
I remember reading something to the tune of the emissions to farm what we need to make the batteries are far worse than what we use to fuel current vehicles, not to mention poor working conditions for those in 3rd world countries. Is any of that stuff true?
There are several. And they generally use the same approach: Identify a problem that is true in concept but exaggerating or misrepresenting its effect. I will list some common ones.
1. Hybrids or battery EVs (BEVs)
The idea is to push for hybrid vehicles instead of BEVs. Hybrids are gasoline or diesel vehicles that have tiny batteries (1 - 2 kWhs) that power a weak electric motor to assist the internal combustion engine (ICE), which gives them better fuel economy than ICEs.
The propaganda is that you can make many more hybrids--which reduce emissions compared to ICEs--if only you stopped using so much resources on BEVs. There are several problems with this claim.
a. Exaggerated ratios
BEVs were ~13% of all vehicles sold in 2023. Plug-in hybrids (PHEVs) make up another 5%. Toyota claims that if only we stopped making BEVs, the materials can be used in batteries of 100 times as many hybrids. Of course, if you multiply 13% by 100, you get 1300%, or 13 times the total number of vehicles sold in the world. We are not going to get 100 times as many hybrids as the number of BEVs we do not build if we stopped BEV production. We are capped at 8 times, because we do not buy that many vehicles. And we actually have more EV battery production capacity than we use in BEVs currently, so by battery capacity, the ratio is going to be even lower than 8.
b. Timeline
Suppose we stopped BEV production and made batteries available to Toyota for hybrids. Toyota is not going to rush out and change their entire lineup to hybrids. They will squeeze the planned life out of their current model designs (~5 - 6 years), and then maybe they will retool their factories for hybrids, and that is if the production lines have reached end of life--as opposed to using the older production lines for cheaper vehicles to be exported to emerging markets. We know they will do this because that is how corporate planning works, and that is how Toyota is actually approaching their hybrid transition--despite significant battery production capacity that can be absorbed by BEVs, and despite that Toyota found success with hybrids 15 years ago with the Prius.
2. Time to recoup manufacturing emissions
The propaganda concept is that because BEVs emit more greenhouse gas during production, it takes too long for BEVs to be better for the environment.
There have been studies on the payback time. If we assume the worst case scenario (an all coal electric grid, the dirtiest electricity possible), the payback time is around 75,000 miles, which most passenger vehicles reach. In reality, there is no grid that is all coal. The payback time is in the range of 30,000 - 60,000 miles, typically within a few years.
3. Hydrogen vehicles
The propaganda concept is that we should be investing in other zero-emission vehicle types to cover all angles. Hydrogen is extremely expensive to produce and distribute.
As we get more renewables, hydrogen electrolysis becomes increasingly feasible as a method to absorb excess electricity production from renewable grids. But that does nothing for storage and distribution, which remain expensive and difficult. I was in lab that was researching hydrogen adsorption to avoid high-pressure and/or cold temperature storage for hydrogen 20 years ago. That did not work out. Fast forward to today, and we are still using high pressure storage as the main hydrogen storage method.
4. Slave labor
The propaganda concept is to point out that a significant amount of cobalt used in lithium batteries is mined in the Congo using slave labor.
There are 2 major lithium battery chemistries used in EVs: lithium nickel-manganese-cobalt (NMC) and lithium iron phosphate (LFP). LFP batteries do not use cobalt, so they avoid the slave labor problem. LFP batteries are around 1/3 of all EV batteries and are taking an increasing share. Automakers are motivated to use them, because they are cheaper than NMC batteries. Moreover, the relative costs of LFP and NMC batteries means that consumers who are shopping for affordable vehicles are less likely to buy something that relies on slave labor (which is highly unusual, because cheaper products are usually associated with worse labor conditions).
thedriven.io
youtu.be
abcnews.go.com
