Tow Vehicles - Toyota Goes Turbo

That drivetrain have been predicted for the new Tundra for awhile, the old Tundra was getting pretty long in the tooth. It's not a new drivetrain, Toyota has decades of experience with turbos, and the Lexus LS00 has had pretty much the same twin turbo 3.5 V6 since 2017.

It's this line from the article that caught my attention though:

Automakers have increasingly started to offer alternative powertrain options ahead of an influx of all-electric pickups in the market in the coming years.

The implucatio is that all of these ICE based alternatives are going to seem like antiquated stop gaps is a few short years. Hybrids in passenger cars have been around for about 25 years now, and are now losing ground quickly to EVs.

That's ok if you only keep your vehicle a few years but if you plan to keep them for 15-20 years like I do it's not so good.

As for Toyota, personally I'm done with them, at least till they prove they have changed direction on EVs. They seem to have spent more efforts in recent years lobbying against improved environmental standards rather than working on solutions.

I saw that about the Tundra a week or so ago. Interesting that they are offering it in a hybrid. That combo could be very good for short-trip mileage.

If you read articles promoted or funded by the fossil fuel industry they will tell you that EVs are not cleaner in locations with high carbon electricity generation. Studies promoted by clean transportation advocates show the opposite. Here for example:

EV Carbon Production

So like many other areas do your own research and decide who you trust. Clearly though, the benefit is higher in locations with greener electric grids.

The way I look at it, to wean off fossil fuels we need to both clean up the grid and clean up transportation emissions, among other actions, and do those things quickly and in parallel. By arguing that EVs aren't that much better if you are charging them from a dirty grid is basically making an excuse to do nothing until someone else does something first. Either you think it is important to address climate change or you don't. If you don't, buy an ICE. If you do, buy an EV, AND put in solar.

Re solar (photovoltaics), I know the cost curve on that very well, as I spent my career working at reducing it. What happens is that any new technology initially costs more than the incumbent technology, and that is used as an argument against adoption, until a tipping point is reached. Until the tipping point occurs the naysayers can readily argue that the new technology is not viable. Then, like magic, the new tech is suddenly everywhere.

The tipping point for PV has occurred sooner in some markets than others. In HI now you can't get an interconnect for grid tied solar in most places (unless you also add storage), the tipping point was reached 5 or more years ago. In comparison here in Appalachia solar is still only a fraction of a percent of the energy production. But that will change soon enough, assuming we don't allow the fossil fuel industry to throw up roadblocks

Re solar life cycle "greenness", the energy payback time for PV is now roughly about a year, with an expected useful life of 35 years or more, meaning that an investment in solar will produce something like 35x more energy that it took to produce it.

If the energy going into production, transportation, and installation is also derived from renewable sources then you can quickly get to near zero CO2 electricity generation. That is one thing the fossil fuel lobby doesn't want you to understand: they want you to assume the input energy into making PV modules or charging EVs is dirty, but as soon as you get a green energy technology to be net positive in energy production/conservation it makes sense to implement it, because it can then begin to displace the dirty input energy, resulting in a virtuous circle.

In the case of Toyota, they are the only major auto manufacturer not to embrace an electric future. GM, Ford, VW, Hyundai, Daimler, etc have all done so. Toyota seems to finally be changing, we'll see. The thing that will enable the transition to EVs to occurr faster than the transition to PV (which has taken a full generation till now) is that EVs are superior to ICE vehicles in almost every dimension. That isn't the case with solar, electrons are all the same. But EVs demonstrate better performance, better reliability, lower maintenance, more convenient home replenishment of energy, and are smoother and quieter. They will reach the tipping point on acquisition cost soon. The only dimension where they lag ICEs is range, and that too is rapidly changing. And for the large majority of consumers, (not including the long distance trailer towers on this forum), the current EV ranges are just fine.

"The only dimension where they lag ICEs is range"

I think the comparison between gasoline use (25 tons) and a 600 lb battery is not accurate. The generation of energy and the resources for that must be included in the EV calculation. How many tons of coal/oil/natural gas/etc. are needed to charge that battery?  I don't argue with your point about impact of events like the pipeline leak in SoCal. That is bad.