AD #3404 – New Toyota EV Coming in 2024; Honda Taking Electrification to 2 Wheels; Peugeot 1st with BEV Wagon

September 13th, 2022 at 11:48am

Audio-only version:
Listen to “AD #3404 – New Toyota EV Coming in 2024; Honda Taking Electrification to 2 Wheels; Peugeot 1st with BEV Wagon” on Spreaker.

Sign up for a demo to hear Dolby Atmos in a Lucid Air at the Detroit Auto Show, booth number 315 on the AutoMobili-D floor from September 14th –15th.

Follow us on social media:

Instagram Twitter Facebook

Runtime: 8:40

0:00 German OEMs Sued For Not Fighting Climate Change
1:00 GM Cruise Expands to Phoenix & Texas
1:35 Toyota bZ5x Coming in 2024
3:09 Honda Expanding Electrification to Two Wheels
4:15 Peugeot 1st EU OEM with BEV Station Wagon
5:00 China Has More EV Chargers Than Anyone Else
6:30 Magna Invests in Micro Mobility & Battery Swapping
7:12 BMW Making Trim Parts from Ocean Waste

Visit our sponsors to thank them for their support of Autoline Daily: Bridgestone, Dolby Atmos, Intrepid Control Systems, MEDC and Schaeffler.

»Subscribe to Podcast |

5661 rss-logo-png-image-68050 stitcher-icon youtube-logo-icon-65475

Thanks to our partner for embedding Autoline Daily on its website:

29 Comments to “AD #3404 – New Toyota EV Coming in 2024; Honda Taking Electrification to 2 Wheels; Peugeot 1st with BEV Wagon”

  1. Albemarle Says:

    Getting worn out fishing nets out of the ocean will be a big help. Perhaps recyclers could add a financial incentive so fishermen turn in their old nets and not just cut them adrift as some do now. Having seen how poorly maintained many factory fishing boats are, I hope they will respond positively.

  2. Lambo2015 Says:

    Good news for Kit. You will finally see a new Station wagon coming out.

    This garbage about suing businesses for not doing enough environmentally. Is exactly that Garbage. Hey the proper way to make change is passing regulation and restrictions to limit ICE or pollutants and as long as the businesses are meeting the guidelines that are required by law I would surly hope any other such lawsuit also gets tosses quicker than it took to submit it.

  3. ChuckGrenci Says:

    2, Can’t agree more on reckless lawsuit against German OEMs. As long as they are not breaking any laws, it is not their responsibility to lead in environmental initiatives. They are welcome to do so but if this goes forward, who’s making the parameters to begin with. Make it law, then you have leverage to enforce compliance.

    China may have the most charging stations, and with their take-rate they need them, but the ‘gorilla in the room’ remains the dirty electricity they use to power them.

  4. Kit Gerhart Says:

    2 It’s nice that Peugeot will have a new wagon, unless you live in the U.S. Peugeot has not sold cars in the U.S. since about 1991, and have confirmed that they will not be returning to the U.S. market.

  5. Kit Gerhart Says:

    3 China will be exporting smelly and smog causing pollution from the cities with adoption of EVs, but ~57% or their electricity comes from coal, emitting lots of greenhouse gas. That aspect isn’t as bad as it appears, though, since EVs are 3-4 times as efficient as ICE vehicles.

  6. Norm T Says:

    But Toyota bz4x is not for sale as they have all been recalled and ordered a stop sale offering buy backs due to the wheels falling off. It might be a year or so until the suspension can be redesigned.

    Did China’s BYD design this one too?

  7. johno Says:

    3 you are right China is building more coal fired plants. They need a lot of cheap energy, so they use coal.

  8. Lambo2015 Says:

    To me, we are just trading one natural resource (oil) for another (Cobalt and Lithium). The impacts of mining these materials has a huge impact to soil degradation, water shortages, loss in biodiversity, damage to ecosystem. Most probably dont know that it takes evaporation ponds to extract Lithium and so they use about 21 Million liters of water to get 1 ton of lithium.
    The tree huggers that are appalled by drilling should probably visit a lithium mine. Plus they should also realize that the plastic that is used in their EV, water bottles, grocery bags is a petroleum product so Drilling wont simply stop because we switch to electric cars.
    There is a lot of possibilities with electric transportation but there is also a lot of things that need to be worked out besides adding as many charging stations as China. I’m just not sold on current EVs being the answer. I think of them more as a stepping stone to get closer to where we need to be. Thats all fine and dandy. I just really hate that EV’s are being pushed as this environmental solution when their actual impact has really yet to be seen.

  9. Wim van Acker Says:

    @8 I see it the same way like you, current EVs are a stepping stone to what will be better. Like the computers in the 1980s were, the Ford Model T was, and so on.

    The damage by mining Lithium is proportional to demand. So, if the percentage of recycling goes up, impact will decrease. The Lithium extracted is currently not needed for other purposes. Extracted oil and natural gas on the other hand should be conserved as much as possible IMHO for applications for which we still do not have an alternative: as feedstock for the petrochemical and plastics industry.

  10. Albemarle Says:

    It’s been shown time and time again that EVs are better for the environment than ICE regardless of the source of the electricity. The largest consumer of cobalt is the oil industry and they recycle none of it. Refineries use enormous amounts of electricity, clean or otherwise. So let’s just get over it. Change is hard. Nothing is perfect.

  11. Kit Gerhart Says:

    8,9 What are EVs a stepping stone to, steam turbine powered vehicles with small nuclear reactors?

    According to this article, petrochemicals account for 14% of oil use, but that will increase, as companies replace the loss of oil use for transportation.

  12. Kevin A Says:

    When the Peugeot wagons are offered in the US under the Chrysler or Dodge brands, what model name do you think they will use? Dodge Magnum? I’d like to see Chrysler Town& Country.

  13. Kit Gerhart Says:

    12 I’d like Chrysler Town and Country as a name for the Peugeot wagon, if it makes it to the US. The Magnum name, if revived, would be better for a big truck or SUV.

  14. Lambo2015 Says:

    10 Yes its been shown time and time again EVs are better for the environment because those studies are funded by who? And we dont know, what we dont know.
    Like back in the 40′s through the 60s when our government thought it was a good idea to do nuclear testing here in the states. We then learned later the effects of Radiation.

    Kind of like back in the 1960s and 70s when someone thought it was a good idea to bring Asian Carp to the US an eco-friendly alternative to poisons for ridding southern fish farms and sewage lagoons of algae, Then they escaped through flooding, and now risk the contaminating Great lakes.
    We didnt use to think much about dumping sewage or chemicals into streams and large bodies of water either and ask anyone from Flint Michigan if it mattered.
    So yea maybe EVs are better than ICE when it comes to pollution but I dont think we know the whole story about their environmental impact quite yet.

    I’m not saying we should stop making EVs or stop developing a better battery. I just wish it was presented more realistically as an alternative mobility and not “green” or environmentally friendly. Because if you look at a Lithium mine I wouldnt call it environmentally friendly.
    It very well may be a step in the right direction, or end up being a mis-step. But either way its not exactly Green.
    Maybe I’m just more skeptical than most.

  15. Wim van Acker Says:

    @11 current EVs are the stepping stone to better EVs: more efficient, better performing batteries with less rare raw materials and a higher percentage of recyclability.

  16. Wim van Acker Says:

    @14 great points, Lambo

  17. Wim van Acker Says:

    @11 71% of oil is currently used for transportation. If we would be able to replace 1/3 of that we would almost triple the availability of oil as a feedstock for the petrochemicals and plastics industries.

  18. Wim van Acker Says:

    @17 in other words that would get us a few additional decades of stability of feedstock supply

  19. Kit Gerhart Says:

    15 Yep, the stepping stone to better EVs is better batteries. Unless I’m missing something, LiFePO4 batteries use less rare materials and last longer, with the main compromise being lower energy density. The energy density difference wouldn’t matter to most people using EVs for commuting with home charging.

    The steam turbine/nuclear idea came to mind as the result of an “airplane of the future” on the cover of an early 1950s Popular Science magazine. It had a nuclear reactor/boiler in the fuselage, and 6 or 8 steam turbines in the wings turning propellers.

  20. Albemarle Says:

    It’s not at all about extending the world’s oil supply. We have lots. No need to worry about it running out.
    It’s about stopping extracting it as soon as possible so we can have a human liveable world. Even if it’s more expensive.

  21. wmb Says:

    The law suit against Mercedes is short sighted, by unfairly focusing only of the OEMs and the auto industry, in its claim that the automaker is not responding fast enough to climate change. Yet, somehow missing and/or choosing not to see the impact that cities and nations of the world, are are dump more climate damaging emissions into the atmosphere then automobiles are! This is due to their aging infrastructure, older, still in use buildings, outdated hvac systems and host of other inefficiencies. IMHO, because of thinking like this, this is the very reason why OEMs want to get out of making ICE vehicles, as quickly as they can! Once they are able to become carbon neutral in their assembly of BEVs, emissions is no longer their problem, but someone else’s! They are no longer in the game of constantly rising emissions standards, and the costs that go into making an ICE vehicle compliant. That burden would now rest on the utility companies, and their ability to reinforce their power grid and producing enough energy for these vehicles! The added bonus for the OEMs, would be the few moving parts of EVs, requiring few people and time to build them, all the while they can charge the same and more for their products. They would loose the Perception of building gas guzzling vehicles, that are destroying the environment. And quickly become the makers of vehicles that are friendly to the environment, whether or not they are as big as the new Hummer BEV!

  22. Lambo2015 Says:

    What may seem contradictory to my posts I am looking forward to what Honda will release in the EV motorcycle arena. I am confident they will do a much better job than Harley Davidson in the aspect that it wont start in the $30,000 range.
    I would absolutely consider an EV motorcycle as that would likely have the range and performance for my needs. Plus I dont ride everyday so a slow 120V charger would probably be fine most of the time.

  23. Lambo2015 Says:

    21 Agree! I wonder if any of the automakers have figured out the actual savings of not having to comply with emission requirements. That requires buildings equipment and personnel that wont be needed.

  24. Kit Gerhart Says:

    22 An electric motorcycle would work for the riding I’ve done the last few years, and with 120v charging. I test rode a Zero bike a few years ago, and might have bought one, if I didn’t already have a KLR650. It will be interesting to see what Honda comes up with.

  25. Kit Gerhart Says:

    Here’s a good article comparing the efficiency of an EV vs an ICE vehicle.

  26. Lambo2015 Says:

    25 Probably should read this too.
    I know its almost 10 years old but says 65% of electricity is loss at the power plant and another 3-10% in transmission.

  27. Lambo2015 Says:

    From the article above;
    Generating electricity, we lost 22 quadrillion Btu from coal, natural gas, nuclear and petroleum power plants in 2013 in the U.S. – that’s more than the energy in all the gasoline we use in a given year.

  28. Kit Gerhart Says:

    26,27 Yeah, I wondered if the article I linked, and its original source added the transmission loss to their source numbers. Even if they didn’t, EVs are more efficient overall.

  29. Lambo2015 Says:

    28 So yeah its easy to say an EV is more efficient from charge to charge than a ICE is from fill-up to fill-up. Or even mile to mile. But getting the energy to the source is also part of that equation. Granted EVs only account for a small fraction of electrical use so all that loss is from powering our homes, factories and businesses. But it highlights the fact that getting the power to your EV isnt all that efficient. I doubt the article you listed included that loss.
    Just brings to light the fact that we also should be looking at increasing the efficiency of our power plants and transmission and distribution networks.
    Kind of like point you make whenever conductive charging is mentioned. Its not as efficient so if you need 100Kw to charge your EV and then add in the loss from conductive charging, transfer and distribution the loss at the power plants etc. How much power actually needs to be generated to get that 100Kw to you?