When people point out the fragility of computer systems and hackers, I just smile.
Yes, there is sheer incompetence sometimes. But sometimes, the weakest links IS the human part. They don’t like “strong passwords”.
Or worse, someone takes an “exception” and launches an “DDoS attack”.
Right here in SA we had one recently …
Kyk, ek wil nou nie snaaks wees nie…
But why do people think critical plant-operating automation stuff is connected to the internet for anyone to hack? And even if a method of ingress is possible, you really think the engineers won’t just rip out the internet connection, restore the backup, and go from there?
I’m not convinced.
Aparently the problem at Toyota is that they could not order parts. The plants are running out of these parts to use in productions. The hack did not shut down the machines. There is just nothing to produce with.
As much as I agree with you, that article in Reuters said this …
So we don’t know the full story of the current situation.
Aaah ok, I need more coffee (that’s the excuse I’m going with today). Taking out a single supplier long enough can have that effect, I get it.
Whilst on the subject of Toyota and their lack of EVs it appears they haven’t been asleep at the wheel:
Let me quote some here:
"Finally, after years of technical problems, efforts to make them are coming to fruition, with the first solid-state Li-ion batteries due to go into production within the next few years.
Toyota, the world’s biggest carmaker, began looking at solid-state batteries in 2012. Over the years it has even intended to show off working prototypes, although little has appeared. The firm recently announced it had made a “technological breakthrough”, however, with plans to start manufacturing a solid-state battery as early as 2027. Toyota claims its new battery will provide an ev with a range of around 1,200km (746 miles), which is about twice that of many existing models, and can be recharged in around ten minutes."
—000—
By 2027, optimistically and if they can get to production scale levels at all. Starting the production in 2027 would likely mean at scale bu 2030-2035. Caveats galore here… Not holding my breath on this one.
Groetnis
Toyota was asleep at the wheel (Puns are fun 
) with this one, other EV makers have started eating their lunch and will probably keep on doing so until they can bring a really competitive product to the market soon (Not 2027 soon) most people don’t need a 1000+km EV in 5-10 years time, they want a well priced 300 - 400km range EV today (Or at least that’s what I want!)
All sorts of issues here: BZ4X:
https://www.insidehook.com/article/vehicles/review-toyota-bz4x
Groetnis
Yup. Even our 100km range little EV does 90% of what needs to be done. Took someone to the airport a while ago (highway driving eats range), round trip around 60km, came home with 20% remaining in the battery. This is about as far as I’m willing to risk right now.
Had to make a second trip last week, into Claremont (84km round trip), I decided to rather take the Diesel. Wish I could take the EV.
That is to say, from my personal experience, 100km range gets almost everyting done, and 150km range would get everything done except the annual holiday trips.
The 94Ah pack BMW had in the i3 (one size up from ours), but priced around 20% down… that should go over really well!
Ja. My commute (when needed) = 130km.
One of those at R350k… man…
I wonder if the SA gov will eventually start dropping the additional taxes on EV’s Prices are starting to come down nicely and if not overly taxed on top of what ICE cars are, it would be nice to see where it goes.
I still think that the new Volvo EX30 shows pretty good value.
I think one of the biggest components here, is the ad valorem tax. If I’m reading this correctly, it was actually increased in 2019, so that you now hit that 30% max at just under 700k, instead of the 847k where it used to be. As inflation makes everything more expensive, and as cars get more expensive even faster than many other things, one would expect this formula to take that into account. A bit like the minimum taxable amount increases every year?
What are the odds of that though…
Must say, this guy is making a lot of sense … he also touched on what I’m thinking.
EVs in SA are a “joke” to solve emissions.
Most of the power today is coming from where in SA? Yeah …
Unless EVs are charged from renewable sources only, it is a farce.
EVs are NOT going to solve the problem at all. It won’t even make a dent if the big problem is not addressed … Countries’ total emissions … and it is but a few big problems children.
And China is doing the most to get themselves sorted FWIW.
Thank you, very very informative! Learned a lot by watching this!
I disagree. At least with the first 10 minutes. After that it gets better.
First, let me explain why the whole “electricity comes from coal” thing is nonsense. An internal combustion engine is around 35% efficient. A coal plant, is on average 35% efficient, but an EV is over 75% efficient, and it has regen braking. That means that worst case scenario, the EV does 75% of 35%, that is around 27%, vs the ICE car’s 35%. Sounds damning? Well, no. Because refining fuel takes electricity, which comes from coal (that is the argument, yes?). And this entire argument starts to break down the moment your energy mix is no longer 100% coal. In terms of efficiency – and that is what it is about, how efficiently are we using the carbon fuels – the EV breaks even or maybe even wins. It is no worse for the environment, regardless of how you slice it.
I firmly believe that if we also add the cost of mining, transporting and refining fuel to the tab of the petrol car (as these people continually do with EVs), they will lose even further.
Secondly, I hate the fatalism in this position. Oh no! The grid is so dirty, and that will never change! Seriously guys? He talks about how many countries don’t have hydro. Yes, those countries usually have sunlight. Stop making excuses.
Third… as many smart people already know… clever man. Clever. I forgot the name of that debate technique. Let’s talk about the materials then. Nickel? Why are people bringing this up. They are probably thinking of the NiMH batteries in some hybrids, I suppose. Cobalt, yes you need cobalt to refine fuel too. Sit down, smart boy. You don’t need as much cobalt, but you do need it. And as we have said repeatedly on this forum, the future seems to be AWAY from cobalt anyway.
Ethical abuses in cobalt. Yes. Fix the abuses. What is this dumb sort of argument, because one thing is wrong (child labour used in mining), we might as well be wrong in something else too (driving dirty cars)? Why not fix both? Yes, we know it is going to take time. The argument doesn’t even end there. Where do most EV makers buy their batteries? Samsung. Where does Samsung buy it’s cobalt? Glencore. Does Glencore use child labour? Have questionable safety practices? Can you prove it? Does your wife, perhaps, wear a diamond ring? You want me to start telling you about blood diamonds? Sit down smart boy. Not all cobalt is bad, and if you think so, please immediately throw away your cell phone, and your wife’s diamond ring. You are part of the problem.
Five, there is not enough resources to make EVs in the future. Really? We have enough Lithium just in the ocean (though it is harder to extract). And lithium is not the only possible metal that can be used for this. What is a stumbling block, is we probably cannot mine the lithium fast enough. But we’re not aiming to replace every car with an EV next year. We’re aiming to do it some time by 2050… maybe.
Six, cover people in acid when they crash!? This guy thinks we’re running lead acid batteries in the cars?
Seven, “Cars are a tiny part of the problem”, shows chart where cars are literally a double-figure percentage. That counts as “needs attention”. There are far greater culprits (fallacy of relative privation), and far dirtier countries (not what counts, what counts is emissions per capita, so China is NOT as bad as the US, they have far more people, at least he mentioned that).
And I disagree with you after I read your first paragraph. 
Comparing coal plant efficiency with EVs and ICE, after we already have the plants messing up the environment, the fuel is already delivered at the pumps … the economies are entrenched … after all the mining has been done already.
For as he said, and I, “EVs are NOT going to solve the problem at all. It won’t even make a dent if the big problem is not addressed … Countries’ total emissions … and it is but a few big problem children.”
And THAT was the core … we get caught up in details, missing the real big picture that we need to focus on and not get emotional over EVs, to “justify” the one smaller segment - just like he said.
Ps. He did not even touch on the other elephant in the room … the converting of millions of existing cars to EVs.
Or, recycling existing cars to build new EVs … and not to built more mines.
Recycling of Lithium batteries …
Big industry is the biggest cause of emissions … how does one address that? More EVs …
Sorry Plonk, but I’m losing faith here.
If he had said: EVs are not the ONLY answer. Then I would have agreed.
But he said: EVs are not the answer.
I beg to differ sir. It is one of the answers.
I also think it is false to say other sectors are not being targeted. They are. Remember how Eskom had to ask permission to run a unit without the scrubbers? That.