NACS Adoption.  Last year we saw Tesla move to create an open standard by allowing anyone in the market use of what it coined NACS (North American Charging Standard).  It wasn't actually a standard, though it did share the protocol used by CCS... which is.  That's what we saw Congress endorse for the federal funding of DC fast-chargers along highway corridors.  The move on Tesla's part was an obvious effort to get more of the money, since the only means of accessing any of that with their propriety connector was to offer compatibility... which is how "Magic Dock" came about.  Adoption leading to a standard is possible.  After all, that is the ultimate goal.  But the process can be difficult.  There are always losers too.  Yesterday, GM jumped ship with the intent to adopt NACS.  We have no idea what that means, especially with the upcoming new Ultium rollouts.  Without any detail how or what would actually happen in the next few years, it brought to mind the arguments against Toyota.  Claims were that Toyota would be scrambling to catch up.  This potential industry shift negates many of the arguments.  Working out logistics of hardware & software adaptations won't be quick.  Much like any technology shift, it takes several years.  Acknowledgement of that reality from keyboard warriors won't ever happen.  I'm quite curious how this will play out in the near future.  Enthusiasts are especially good at spinning news online.  For me, there's no reason to even point out how their statements about Toyota have been deflated.  My decision was to put it this way:  Claims of "too late" are vindicated by actions like this, confirming the industry isn't as far along as enthusiasts portray.  Absence of a charging-standard in a major market... for years to come... along with battery-chemistry still maturing reveals this marathon has only just begun.

Solterra Sales.  It is easy for some to completely miss the point: "Unless Toyota cut Subaru an amazing deal, I doubt the company is making anything from these; they will have little reason to ship more than they need to sell to meet compliance requirements."  That belief of success being measured from high-volume sales is common.  Since when must a product start that way?  What is wrong with low-volume, following a path "compliance" vehicles take?  It comes from the belief that being forced to comply means there is no other benefit unless you fully embrace the mandate as an immediate opportunity.  Looking at the situation as a long-term strategy doesn't argue well online.  Enthusiasts seek quick victory.  If the return isn't right away, they are not interested.  They don't find slow & steady rewarding.  Their perspective is understandable.  That doesn't make it a good one though, especially for an automaker like Toyota... who knows their audience has little to nothing in common with enthusiasts... which makes it very easy to post this in return:  Toyota/Subaru could be the only legacy automakers unwilling to sell loss-leaders, only producing enough to actually deliver profit.  There is simply no point pushing volume when the stage the industry is at is to built confidence.  Proving reliability doesn't take large volume. In fact, the same complaints being made now are what we heard about Prius 20 years.  Toyota didn't see a benefit from producing more.  That proved a wise decision too.  It's an effective means of avoiding generation related issues... something Toyota has extensive experience with.

Condo Installs.  It was interesting to read an article from a Canadian condo owner who pursued the opportunity to install level-2 chargers for everyone in the complex.  With a ramp having 330 parking spots spread among 4 levels, I was quite curious about what he found.  This was my key takeaway: "We spent the money on investigation.  Our 330 stalls will cost over C$400,000 to fully wire, without chargers mind you.  The BC provincial government will give us C$120,000 in rebates for that.  The final cost is around C$1,000 per stall to get the building to be EV ready, where an owner can relatively inexpensively add a charger to their stall."  Hopefully, there will be follow-up detailing the outcome.  Here's what I posted:  Agreed about the per stall cost sounding reasonable and I have the same questions.  The assumption is metering & billing is simply tied to the owners ordinary electrical service.  It's that matter of capacity which rises to the top of concerns.  Would there be throttling during peak demand or higher per-kilowatt cost during the day verses overnight?  The other assumption is that wiring will be for a reasonable maximum, like 8-gauge wire to provide a sustained 32-amp draw.  So if you drive an electricity-guzzler, too bad.  Everyone gets the same top-speed of 7.6 kW regardless of what they drive, right?

Oblivious To Facts.  Sometimes, facts are either dismissed outright or not even known.  As a result of that, I got into a lengthy exchange with such a person.  He replied to my posts very quickly.  It was quite clear he had already made up his mind based on limited & bias information.  Toyota was desperately behind with BEV production and that nothing else would prove otherwise.  In other words, he was measuring progress from the top down.  If he couldn't see a finished product, there was nothing to show for any effort being made, period.  This was a sprint, not a marathon.  You cannot win a race from the bottom up.  Toyota's extensive experience designing & refining motors, controllers, inverters, chargers and software for hybrids doesn't count... even though that directly contributes to BEV progress.  Knowledge from PHEV is just outright dismissed, brushed aside as worthless... a complete waste of time & resources.  That level of foolishness is more than just being oblivious.  Those are cold, hard facts proving Toyota hasn't been caught completely off-guard and is scrambling from being +5 years behind everyone else.  It's looking more and more that 2 years from now, Toyota will not only catch up, they will pass other legacy automakers.  That's why the analogy of a marathon works so well.  Toyota is taking their time, running the race with the knowledge that an initial sprint can be costly overall.  There is little to gain from rushing to market.  Think about how the struggles with software are already becoming a major issue for VW.  Think about how Tesla's absence of a charging standard here will impede infrastructure investment.  Think about how GM's hype about Ultium sets expectations so high it will be practically impossible to deliver.  The fact that Toyota has already proven reliability using a hidden approach, using hybrids as a stepping stone EV enthusiasts deem an unworthy investment, is a gain for Toyota.  That's how you commit to volume and ensure profitability.  Some just plain don't care.  Some deny reality.  To them, like the guy who chose to argue with me today, I share wisdom like this:  Toyota is already producing those components by the millions annually.  Making their design of hybrid operate as an EV is just a matter of increasing battery-capacity and adding a clutch.  That's why their path to BEV makes so much sense for them.  Toyota already invested years ago.

Narrative Comeback.  Keeping the distraction alive requires distraction.  This was that effort to spin what's happening: "Thought with a new CEO, Toyota was making the transition to EV's.  Not so!  Toyota is continuing to drag its' heels in EV adoption!"  It's just an attempt to downplay.  Such a comeback is telling.  They have nothing.  Anyone who does searches on Toyota's EV adoption will find current offerings with more to follow.  Stumbling across a variety of BEV and PHEV choices is quite probable.  It doesn't take much imagination to recognize returned results from a search as being supportive.  How do antagonists think "dragging" will be the conclusion a random person on the internet will come to?  Most people have encounters with a plug-in vehicle from time to time, but don't give it much thought beyond that.  They will know about Tesla and perhaps seen advertisements from GM.  A quick search (while typing this) for "electric vehicle" returned a wide variety of brands and related topics.  There wasn't really anything specific.  That's why narratives thrive online.  When digging for more information, you will inevitably end up following a bias.  That's how narratives are able to thrive.  Needless to say, it ends up becoming a collection of opinions... mostly from enthusiasts.  Fortunately, what really irritates enthusiasts is the presentation of fact.  So, that's exactly how I replied:  Believing that narrative requires a person to ignore the recent added investment commitment of $2.1 Billion more in the North Carolina sight specifically for BEV battery manufacturing on top of the $2.5 Billion already allocated.

1% Obsession.  News of Toyota adding another $2.1 Billion to their near-term plans for United States specifically for BEV production has really stirred rhetoric.  That almost always means attacks based about hydrogen, clear desperation to change the topic of discussion.  For example, this was the primary argument posted on the topic of adding BEV spending: "And that leftover 1% will live a life of compromise. Or as Mirai owners like to say 'Half full is the new empty.' "  Divert attention away from the 99% to completely focus on something else.  Ugh.  That's such blatant trolling, it's absurd to have to deal with it.  But everything a worthwhile bit of news highlighting progress Toyota makes, their is a scramble to drown out that message.  You can't just ignore their noise either.  Here's how I addressed it this time, knowing it won't go away:  Interesting how some obsess with 1%, wasting time on a distraction.  Who cares?  It's just part of their portfolio, like the $6 Billion being invested in the next few years for US battery-related production.  It's not like Tesla doesn't have their own diversity investments.  That obsession also fails to address actual barriers BEV still face.  There are some who plan to pay for expensive gas and stick with buying used ICE until they die.  So what if the market isn't pure?  It hasn't ever been so far.

Taking Risk.  If you listen to the narrative, Toyota is avoiding any type of risk.  If you look at actual facts, you see the story is quite different.  You have to look.  Simply following the swill from enthusiasts isn't enough.  For example: "Considering that BYD and Toyota are partners, things are not as simple as they might at first appear.  If Toyota play their cards well, they can gain a significant advantage."  That was a great example of downplay.  Portraying the situation as an opportunity not yet taken is hoped to prevent the discovery of risk already having been taken.  I was all to happy to point out what had been omitted, exposing their comments as an effort to mislead:  The partnership with CATL could prove fruitful as well.  Ironically, that play already proven naysayers were incorrect claiming Toyota was unwilling to take risks.  We know CATL wants to grow too, especially with a foothold in the United States.  That is exactly what the AWD model of bZ4X there is helping to fulfill.

All-In Fade.  Remember how last year declaring "all in" was a cry for victory?  It was a shallow & consequenceless promise.  There was no substance or merit to support such a stance.  In fact, it was a just another "EV market" distraction from reality.  Don't pay attention to anything except hype coming from legacy automakers, just look at what Tesla is doing.  Meanwhile, we see GM investing heavily in traditional SUV production.  That's why focusing on Toyota is essential.  Only thing is, that chant for "all in" is fading away.  It is barely a talking point now.  Not even remotely close to any type of first step toward that, they have already moved on to something else.  First clue is that the Equinox promised for Spring 2023 never happened.  That's why we get posts like this instead: "This is interesting news, for two reasons...  1) there was an article just put out the other day where Toyota Japan said something about BEV's not being the future because they have a new Hydrogen Combustion engine that will be the future...  2) this article says the Kentucky plant will produce a THREE row BEV.  That's interesting!  (bZ5X?)"  Do everything possible to keep attention on Toyota.  Don't actually check to see what GM is doing.  That's why I had so many battles with Volt enthusiasts.  They were the most outspoken and they used Toyota as their scapegoat.  Recognize the pattern repeating?  What happens with Equinox & Bolt should be interesting.  Anywho, this is how I replied to today's nonsense:  There are narratives being pushed to make Toyota the antithesis, since that perspective helps distract from barriers the BEV purists are now facing.  They don't want to acknowledge the reality a transition is necessary.  Their hope for "all in" has already revealed several major challenges preventing the timeline they were planning on.  Those inconvenient truths vindicate Toyota's approach... backing them into a corner.  We have seen this history play out already.  It's fascinating to watch it repeat.

Software Blindness.  The narrative is so prevalent, some fail to see what should be obvious... the software.  But then again, the best written software is the kind that goes unnoticed.  It's like special-effects in movies.  If you don't realize that's what you are seeing, those who did the work to make that happen celebrate.  That silent victory is what I have strived for as a software engineer for over 3 decades now.  That's why I find comments like this so telling: "Japanese mindset still got stuck at WW2.  They still strongly believe in manufacturing technology, not the software.  This news is hardly surprising.  Just don't hold breath any Japanese car manufacturers will ever catch up."  It gives me the opportunity for a brief conveyance of inconvenient truths, derailing their supposedly superiority to what they clearly overlooked:  Huh?  The EV drive software for Prius Prime has delivered 6.5 years of flawless electric-only operation... originally derived from their first-gen PHEV and their multiple generations of FCEV.  Those refinements to motor, inverter, etc. carried over to the BEV.  Adding to that is how quickly Toyota was able to deliver a software upgrade from the feedback provided last winter.  Claiming weak belief simply doesn't match reality.

Wow!  It is exhilarating to see comments like this: "Oh wow, that's wild that's your channel!  Before I got my Prime, I watched pretty much all of your Prime / PHEV videos!  Love all the statistics and info they provided!"  That came about from sharing my test footage, the latest from my work-in-progress videos.  I'm getting closer to the point of being able to formally produce something.  Summer distractions have been slowing that effort.  But then again, there is no rush... since like everyone else, I'm waiting for the software update.  Once that finally comes, I'll be ready.  June was the target for this market.  We'll see.  In the meantime, this is my status:  The effort to improve video quality continues.  This capture was my first attempt in afternoon rush-hour traffic, using an external monitor connected to the camera to capture the dashboard display.  With that approach, I could avoid background glare by covering it entirely yet still see it.  Unfortunately, resolution was set too high for that long of a drive, causing the camera to overheat.  I got over 30 minutes of footage to work with before it automatically shut off though.  It looks pretty good too.

Dirty Secret.  I'm glad someone noticed: "The last line of the chart is the big dirty secret of home charging.  Even at 12A, there is enough electricity to more than cover the typical average 37 miles of driving each day that the typical US driver does in a typical day."  Results of that study were clearly cherry-picked, drawing a conclusion favorable to BEV by simply just ignoring what they didn't like.  In reality, the study showed favorable data for anything with a plug.  Whether or not the vehicle included a gas-engine didn't make any difference.  I was happy to point that out too:  That is exactly why there is so much hate for PHEV from BEV purists.  They are well aware that the daily EV driving experience can be delivered to a vehicle with an ICE using nothing but an ordinary 120-volt outlet.  No need to commit to a level-2 right away and fear of "range anxiety" is completely squashed.  Starting with such a simple solution is a great way to begin household transition to BEV.  It becomes compelling to upgrade from level-1 in a well-informed manner and makes the decision to replace the rest of the vehicles there with BEV a no-brainer.

Smaller Battery-Packs.  Kia's reveal of an entry-level EV6 has provided interesting argument material.  It directly contradicts what enthusiasts have been promoting.  Gotta love that.  It was only a matter of time before their anti-mainstream position would become a problem to defend.  They favor niche offerings but absolutely refuse to admit it.  Their denial is self-defeating.  It is what I witnessed with Volt enthusiasts.  Their own stance would be their greatest weakness.  Ugh.  You'd think they would wise up to the obvious contradiction.  Group-Think is quite blinding though.  They didn't.  It spelled their own doom.  I watched it happen, doing everything I could along the way to get them to see what they were doing.  But when backed into a corner, they only fight harder.  It was absurd to witness.  Oh well.  I guess I get to witness that again.  I posted:  EV6 delivering a 232-mile range is a topic of much intrigue.  Since the AWD model of bZ4X delivering 228 miles was labeled at DOA, this puts enthusiasts in difficult position.  They have been avoiding discussion the 209-mile rating for ID.4 built in Chattanooga.  Every time that particular offering was brought up, something was done to evade acknowledgement.  Admitting the lower cost and resulting higher efficiency (from less weight) would help BEV adoption derails their argument of more range being better.  After all, we have seen shorter range vehicles as quite popular in Europe & China.  For that matter, recognition of actual daily need ends up providing an endorsement for PHEV.  It was only a matter of time before their stance backed them into a hypocritical corner.