Toyota Mirai Fuel Cell

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Nope, I have no comprehensive sales data to that end because there is none AFAIK. I've been following them closely though. If you look at the carsalesbase data, the big spike in august of 2016 coincided with the Sacramento legislature renewing their fleet, and them announcing the purchase of 80 Mirais across a couple entities. I've been subsequently following other press releases and disclosure showing lots of smaller government entities also buying or leasing them for both commuting and official duty. This is also in line with Jerry Brown's 30% ZEV requirement on government vehicles. There's also a $15k public fleet rebate on top of the $15k purchase help and free fuel if you buy an FCEV for public duties.

Like you, I'd love to actually have hard data on to who, where and how they are selling. All I have to go on are vague inferences, and those seem to point to most of them going to port authorities, government and other fleet management companies. Very few in the grand scheme of things seem to actually go to consumers.

Another bit of trivia is that for such a trailblazing vehicle, very few people are talking about it as owners. Just here in the Netherlands, we have only about 5000 Nissan Leafs driving around (similar to the amount of Mirais in CA), yet there are multiple active forums dedicated to it from times when sales were much lower even. The state of Mirai forums is beyond dreadful; maybe one post a month in the most active owner's forum. Even facebook groups are dead. The subreddit is just one guy religiously posting anything that even vaguely has to do with Mirai press releases or hydrogen. If there are people who are genuinely enthusiastic about the car and tech, I'd expect more than the usual three or four sycophants to say stuff on the internet about them. And I'm one of those three or four people!

Hell, the EV1 had much more active internet forums, and back then the internet barely existed! No joke. It's a crying shame that I can't show you www.gmev.com on the wayback machine, it was an awesome site... 20 years ago.

The Clarity has a lot more hustle and bustle around it, but nobody is buying the FCEV. It's all people raving (for good reason) about the PHEV and BEV, both of which are excellent vehicles in their own right.
 
mux said:
What they should be doing, and IMO what would be a signifier of a company truly serious about hydrogen, is if one of the big automakers releases a plug-in electric-fuel cell hybrid. Something with both a decent battery (say 24 or 30kWh) and a small range extender fuel cell, say 10kW or so. That would be easily cheap enough to make a car that sells well and gets consumers accustomed to hydrogen without the range anxiety of not having anywhere to fill up.
Exactly. The lack of a plug is proof that they are not serious about this technology. I pointed this out nearly four years ago on page 104 of the H2 thread:
RegGuheert on August said:
But for the kinds of FCVs being produced by the car manufacturers today, the utility is only marginally better than a BEV for long-distance travel, and worse for commuting. Those cars need a plug, but it has gone missing. Without one, they will cost more to purchase AND more to operate than the equivalent BEV.
The lack of a plug on ANY of the H2 FCV cars for sale in the U.S. is very telling, IMO.
 
cwerdna said:
mux said:
I've always been super interested in the sales trends, especially because Toyota is quite secretive about it. What I've been able to figure out so far:

- The vast, vast majority of FCEVs is sold to government agencies, municipalities, etc. You can see this clearly in the yearly leasing cycle
I've never noticed that. Have any data on that? Have any direct data about it going to govt entities? I've yet to see any Mirais or FCEVs here in the Bay Area that have CA exempt plates. They all seem to be leased by private individuals. There's at least 1 or 2 at my work. It helps that the H2 fueling station is down the street. I sometimes see a Mirai fueling there. Haven't stopped to say hi or check their plate.

I sometimes see one running around my area (near home). I don't recall if it's the same color and same Mirai that's parked on the driveway of a street connected to mine.

I sometimes see some Mirai's getting onto highway 17 but never got a close enough look to see if it belongs to anyone at work. I don't think the colors are right.
I haven't seen any exempt FCEVs either. Although the sales totals to date favor the Mirai, I see far more Clarity FCEVs. Last Friday I saw four Claritys during the evening rush hour, one of which was a PHEV and the other three undetermined, but probably either FCEV (more likely) or BEV (less). The only way I know to tell them apart is by the badging on the fenders. The PHEV says "Plug-In Hybrid" on two lines like a Prius, the others say "Fuel Cell" or "Electric" on one line. If I'm at an intermediate distance I can tell if it's one or two lines, but can't read them. Oh, saw the first Red HOV sticker that day as well, but don't remember what it was on.
 
Per IEVS, May U.S. Mirai sales/leases were 102, up from 76 last month, and 640 total for the year. Still very limited, but the first MoM increase this year. Still waiting on Clarity FCEV lease info.
 
GRA ib June 3 said:
<span>Per IEVS, May U.S. <a href="http://www.mytoyotamirai.com" class="interlinkr">Mirai<span class="tip">Visit the Mirai Forum</span></a> sales/leases were 102, up from 76 last month, and 640 total for the year. Still very limited, but the first MoM increase this year. Still waiting on Clarity FCEV lease info.</span>
GRA on June 1 said:
May U.S. Mirai sales per IEVS: 162 (579 YTD). The IEVS article has a mistake and says 305 YTD, which was the total at the end of March IIRR. Of note, the Clarity FCEV saw its leases jump to 119 in May (previous high 42 in January), so I think the word is spreading that it's a better car than the Mirai.
In other words, fewer than 63% as many Mirais were moved this May versus May 2017.

So much for Toyota's grandiose predictions for fuel-cell vehicles made back in 2005:
RegGuheert said:
Then he makes his predictions:
Jim Press - Then COO of Toyota North America at 1:03:18 said:
Ten years from now, you'll begin to see hydrogen-powered cars here and there.
O.K. There are a handful out there. But I've never seen one. What I do see "here and there" are BEVs. He goes on:
Jim Press - Then COO of Toyota North America at 1:03:22 said:
But 15 to 20 years from now they'll be the norm.
Does anyone think H2 FCVs will be "the norm" within the next 2 to 7 years. I don't. In fact, I predict I will never see a single one on the roads around here in that time frame.

Lots of money has been taken from taxpayers and wasted on this effort.
 
RegGuheert said:
GRA ib June 3 said:
<span>Per IEVS, May U.S. <a href="http://www.mytoyotamirai.com" class="interlinkr">Mirai<span class="tip">Visit the Mirai Forum</span></a> sales/leases were 102, up from 76 last month, and 640 total for the year. Still very limited, but the first MoM increase this year. Still waiting on Clarity FCEV lease info.</span>
GRA on June 1 said:
May U.S. Mirai sales per IEVS: 162 (579 YTD). The IEVS article has a mistake and says 305 YTD, which was the total at the end of March IIRR. Of note, the Clarity FCEV saw its leases jump to 119 in May (previous high 42 in January), so I think the word is spreading that it's a better car than the Mirai.
In other words, fewer than 63% as many Mirais were moved this May versus May 2017.
Quite so, and I imagine most of the difference is due to the availability of the Clarity FCEV. Mirai sales dropped after the Clarity became available, just as you'd expect for two vehicles competing in the same limited niche. [Edit] IEVS now has Clarity FCEV numbers, 30 for May, which is very poor compared to last month. I wonder if this is an inventory problem.

RegGuheert said:
So much for Toyota's grandiose predictions for fuel-cell vehicles made back in 2005:
RegGuheert said:
Then he makes his predictions:
Jim Press - Then COO of Toyota North America at 1:03:18 said:
Ten years from now, you'll begin to see hydrogen-powered cars here and there.
O.K. There are a handful out there. But I've never seen one. What I do see "here and there" are BEVs. He goes on:
Jim Press - Then COO of Toyota North America at 1:03:22 said:
But 15 to 20 years from now they'll be the norm.
Does anyone think H2 FCVs will be "the norm" within the next 2 to 7 years. I don't. In fact, I predict I will never see a single one on the roads around here in that time frame.

Lots of money has been taken from taxpayers and wasted on this effort.
Shall we also talk about Carlos Ghosn's predictions of when there'd be 500k LEAFs, or President Obama's prediction of when there'd be 1 million PEVs in the U.S. (or the $100 million that Ecotality got from the government before going bankrupt and selling their assets for $4 million to CCGI)? "It is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future."
 
I'm somewhat willing to pitch for the other side of the argument: I do think that FCEVs are a growth market overall. But absolutely not for consumers, there is just no motivation at all. The real growth will be in heavy duty vehicles, and a lot of this growth will depend on what segment of the market they will be able to grab soon enough. Short-range trucks will obviously go battery-electric, as will last mile deliveries, but long haul? They might very well go with fuel cells on restricted routes with long range. Keep in mind that a lot of money can be saved with high uptime, and that can offset the added expense of fuel cell systems and fueling stations. A couple million per filling station is a lot of money, but on the TCO of a fleet it's nothing. So there is still a bit of a niche there.

Now, if some company comes out with MWh-scale batteries in class 8 trucks and road trains AND provides competitive ultra fast chargers at docking bays, that's game over for ground-based hydrogen. Loading and unloading times are in the order of required charging time, so there is a no-wait option for BEV truck charging as well. That completely removes the USP of hydrogen. However, it does add cost to the fleet operator who will likely need giant buffer batteries and many charging points at their warehouses. I'd wager those are in the same order of magnitude, maybe more expensive than a single hydrogen filling station.

It's hard to say until we see some serious efforts in the truck and heavy duty vehicle space. Both Nikola One (if it's a real truck) and Tesla Semi are years still years out.
 
mux said:
I'm somewhat willing to pitch for the other side of the argument: I do think that FCEVs are a growth market overall. But absolutely not for consumers, there is just no motivation at all. The real growth will be in heavy duty vehicles, and a lot of this growth will depend on what segment of the market they will be able to grab soon enough. Short-range trucks will obviously go battery-electric, as will last mile deliveries, but long haul? They might very well go with fuel cells on restricted routes with long range. Keep in mind that a lot of money can be saved with high uptime, and that can offset the added expense of fuel cell systems and fueling stations. A couple million per filling station is a lot of money, but on the TCO of a fleet it's nothing. So there is still a bit of a niche there.

Now, if some company comes out with MWh-scale batteries in class 8 trucks and road trains AND provides competitive ultra fast chargers at docking bays, that's game over for ground-based hydrogen. Loading and unloading times are in the order of required charging time, so there is a no-wait option for BEV truck charging as well. That completely removes the USP of hydrogen. However, it does add cost to the fleet operator who will likely need giant buffer batteries and many charging points at their warehouses. I'd wager those are in the same order of magnitude, maybe more expensive than a single hydrogen filling station.

It's hard to say until we see some serious efforts in the truck and heavy duty vehicle space. Both Nikola One (if it's a real truck) and Tesla Semi are years still years out.

I see you've omitted the pink elephant (the cost of the fuel) in your devil's advocacy. Fleet operators are just as sensitive to the cost of fuel as to any of the other factors. At 100k miles per truck per year and assuming 10 miles per kg of H2 (extrapolating from the mirai's efficiency to the 6mpg that trucks get), that's 10,000 kg of H2 per truck, per year. A fleet of 20 trucks would easily cost $1million/year just to fuel. No fleet operator is going to want that albatross around their neck, especially since it costs half that to run their existing diesel trucks.

So even if Tesla Semi falls behind, and doesn't meet its production timeline, FCEV trucks are not going to make much inroads.
 
Fuel isn't necessarily a dealbreaker, as you can (in a lot of places at least) offset per-unit fuel cost by doing onsite electrolysis using spare solar power. This transforms fuel to manufactured power. You'll need more solar panels for hydrogen synthesis and compression than to power battery-electric trucks, but the cost of solar is already so low and only going down. If you are operating a fleet and have control over the endpoints of journeys, this is a relatively small piece of the puzzle.

I don't think this is necessarily a dealbreaker.

Ultimately, this is rather weak devil's advocacy, and that is in part because there is no fundamental advantage to fuel cells. You have to construct application niches from transient weaknesses in battery technology. Charging speed and fuel density are basically the only things you can go off of and in heavy duty vehicles, because of high equipment and labor cost, you want to maximize utilization. Fueling is downtime, so you can offset cost disadvantages of hydrogen fuel cells with fueling speed. This isn't a trivial amount of money; a trucker may fill up $200 worth of fuel and take $25 in time to do so, charging a battery may be the complete reverse. A fuel cell truck may fill up in the same amount of time and cost $50 in fuel, so still represent an overall lower TCO. Plug in whatever numbers you think are reasonable, I'm happy to discuss this in detail with some real numbers.
 
mux said:
Fuel isn't necessarily a dealbreaker, as you can (in a lot of places at least) offset per-unit fuel cost by doing onsite electrolysis using spare solar power. This transforms fuel to manufactured power. You'll need more solar panels for hydrogen synthesis and compression than to power battery-electric trucks, but the cost of solar is already so low and only going down. If you are operating a fleet and have control over the endpoints of journeys, this is a relatively small piece of the puzzle.
At a COST of OVER US$9.00/kg, extracting H2 from water through electrolysis is the MOST expensive form of H2 fuel. If you use photovoltaics to produce the electricity instead of grid power, you reduce the per-unit cost of the fuel, but you increase the capital cost of the equipment by reducing utilization, so it is not a real savings but instead likely increases costs.

You said it best here:
mux said:
Ultimately, this is rather weak devil's advocacy, and that is in part because there is no fundamental advantage to fuel cells. You have to construct application niches from transient weaknesses in battery technology.
 
GRA said:
RegGuheert said:
GRA ib June 3 said:
<span>Per IEVS, May U.S. <a href="http://www.mytoyotamirai.com" class="interlinkr">Mirai<span class="tip">Visit the Mirai Forum</span></a> sales/leases were 102, up from 76 last month, and 640 total for the year. Still very limited, but the first MoM increase this year. Still waiting on Clarity FCEV lease info.</span>
GRA on June 1 said:
May U.S. Mirai sales per IEVS: 162 (579 YTD). The IEVS article has a mistake and says 305 YTD, which was the total at the end of March IIRR. Of note, the Clarity FCEV saw its leases jump to 119 in May (previous high 42 in January), so I think the word is spreading that it's a better car than the Mirai.
In other words, fewer than 63% as many Mirais were moved this May versus May 2017.
Quite so, and I imagine most of the difference is due to the availability of the Clarity FCEV. Mirai sales dropped after the Clarity became available, just as you'd expect for two vehicles competing in the same limited niche. [Edit] IEVS now has Clarity FCEV numbers, 30 for May, which is very poor compared to last month. I wonder if this is an inventory problem.
So if we somehow imagine that Honda Clarities are Toyota Mirais, we have May 2018 sales at about 81% of May 2017 sales. But the Honda Clarity is not a Toyota Mirai...
 
RegGuheert said:
GRA said:
RegGuheert said:
In other words, fewer than 63% as many Mirais were moved this May versus May 2017.
Quite so, and I imagine most of the difference is due to the availability of the Clarity FCEV. Mirai sales dropped after the Clarity became available, just as you'd expect for two vehicles competing in the same limited niche. [Edit] IEVS now has Clarity FCEV numbers, 30 for May, which is very poor compared to last month. I wonder if this is an inventory problem.
So if we somehow imagine that Honda Clarities are Toyota Mirais, we have May 2018 sales at about 81% of May 2017 sales. But the Honda Clarity is not a Toyota Mirai...
Quite so, the Clarity's generally a better deal. OTOH, both are generally considered ugly or at least weird-looking, and are also sedans, which doesn't help sales of either of them. Add to that the fueling network is well behind schedule, and has concentrated on expanding density and capacity in urban areas (which is certainly needed to boost owner confidence and convenience for routine driving) at the expense of expanding coverage into new areas, and the problems/mistakes are piling up. We won't see any major increase in station numbers until 2019, and those are all density/capacity infill.
 
Via IEVS:
From O’Groats To Land’s End In A Toyota Mirai?
https://insideevs.com/from-ogroats-to-lands-end-in-a-toyota-mirai/

. . . A team from Autocar started at John O’Groats on the north and drove south to Land’s End covering 1,109 miles (1,784 km) over a few days. Driving FCVs in the UK requires a lot of caution, as the hydrogen stations are far from each other (by the end of 2018 there will be 16 total). . . .

Because there were fears about hydrogen consumption, the driver played it safe and, for example, on the first leg of 230 miles to Aberdeen, turned off the air conditioner.

Some gear was carried in a backup car to decrease the weight of the Mirai. In other places, they decreased speed – “we drive like we’re towing a caravan”. It doesn’t sound encouraging, but without infrastructure, there was no choice. Interestingly, it was noted that Mirai doesn’t have regenerative braking, as the small battery would not be able to accept the power or much energy.

Overall here are the stats from driving the Toyota Mirai in the UK:

  • 1,109 miles (1,784 km)
    19 hours and 40 minutes
    average speed 56 mph (90 km/h)
    hydrogen consumption of 0.9 kg per 100 km (62 miles)
    total 16.1 kg of hydrogen consumed at £193 ($255) or 17.9p per mile $0.23 per mile
    15 minutes spent on refuelling (four stops)
    exhausted 14.5 litres of unadulterated water. . . .
As always, this example makes clear that any AFV is dependent on an adequate fueling infrastructure as well as the price of that fuel for its commercial viability. For H2/FCEVs, neither is there yet; even so, the average speed and minimal amount of time spent refueling reinforce the advantages for road trips of long range combined with rapid energy replacement, commensurate with liquid-fueled ICEs.
 
GRA said:
For H2/FCEVs, neither is there yet; even so, the average speed and minimal amount of time spent refueling reinforce the advantages for road trips of long range combined with rapid energy replacement, commensurate with liquid-fueled ICEs.
Compared to what? A comparably-priced Tesla Model 3 (which can likely be built at a profit at that price, unlike the Toyota Mirai), could make this trip with only two stops with air conditioning and likely would get there faster. The fuel for the trip would likely cost less than about 1/4 as much, even paying the standard Supercharger rates.
 
RegGuheert said:
GRA said:
For H2/FCEVs, neither is there yet; even so, the average speed and minimal amount of time spent refueling reinforce the advantages for road trips of long range combined with rapid energy replacement, commensurate with liquid-fueled ICEs.
Compared to what? A comparably-priced Tesla Model 3 (which can likely be built at a profit at that price, unlike the Toyota Mirai), could make this trip with only two stops with air conditioning and likely would get there faster. The fuel for the trip would likely cost less than about 1/4 as much, even paying the standard Supercharger rates.
And since they both need fueling infrastructure the EV would be far lower cost to build out the stations required.
 
Yeah, you quickly run into the quite big difference between theoretical energy transfer speeds and actual time spent on refueling by the user. The only honest way to compare refueling technologies is by comparing actual trip times, and this heavily favors BEVs for a long time still. Really, the only reason gasoline refueling is so relatively quick isn't due to the high energy density of the fuel alone, it's mainly because of how incredibly widespread gas stations are so you can always find one along your itinerary. That comes at an immense cost though, and it's really unlikely that people are willing to 'upgrade' to an AFV only to find out they're spending the same and having less convenience.
 
Was in Japan for two weeks in June. Went to Megaweb Toyota City Showcase in Tokyo. There they had every car they sell in Japan. 80% of the cars there were built on the Prius platform. Crowns (Camry) all kinds of small vans and econo cars were built on the Prius platform.
They had one Mirai and one gentleman who was demoing it. He said that there were 100 functioning Hydrogen fueling stations in the greater Tokyo area. 100 might seem like a lot but in a metropolitan area of 37 million people it is not many. I asked him if Toyota was subsidizing people for the cost of hydrogen. He looked at me like I had two heads. They do not subsidize for hydrogen in Japan. Which might explain why I never saw one the entire time I was there.
 
downeykp said:
Was in Japan for two weeks in June. Went to Megaweb Toyota City Showcase in Tokyo. There they had every car they sell in Japan. 80% of the cars there were built on the Prius platform. Crowns (Camry) all kinds of small vans and econo cars were built on the Prius platform.
You talking about TNGA?

http://www.toyota-global.com/innovation/tnga/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_New_Global_Architecture

IIRC, gen 4 Prius (2016+ model year) was delayed due to TNGA. (I don't follow Prius very closely any more, as my focus has shifted to Leaf and EVs. It doesn't help that Toyota really screwed up the styling on the gen 4 Prius. :cry: :evil: )
 
Oh, hydrogen is subsidized big time in Japan, just not very visibly. Pretty much all of the first 45ish hydrogen fueling stations in the country were completely bought and paid for by the government and a lot of the hydrogen production capacity is also completely subsidized. That being said, they don't get the free hydrogen pass for 3 years that you get in California as well as the much lower leasing/buying price.

And that's also why Mirais are so much more common in CA than anywhere else; CA/Toyota US simply gives by far the most subsidies. There's well over $100k worth of subsidies going into a single Mirai over its lifespan, even outside of the loss they're making on the car's production. It's mind-boggling. I wonder if the Nexo is going to be better in this regard, because this is highly unsustainable.
 
Back
Top