TheaterFire

Why The Hybrid 2026 Toyota RAV4 Benefits The Environment More Than Some Fully Electric Vehicles | The Autopian

Posted by tallon4@reddit | cars | View on Reddit | 23 comments

[removed]

Reply to Post

23 Comments

Medalineman@reddit

Toyota continues to try and excuse their lack of competitive EV’s, and a lack of building out their own infrastructure. They sure huffed their own farts for 20 years after making the Prius, which was a genuine innovation. They claim it’s due to battery shortages, well, spoiler alert Toyota, you could’ve expanded battery production, or made the switch to lithium batteries a long time ago. They’ve built a new plant that’s working to get up to speed, but it’s telling how they’ve needed more capacity for batteries for years and refused to build out excess production until given money to do so.
View on Reddit #56903628

SnooHamsters6940@reddit

The market is significantly larger for hybrids than it is for EVs. I think that Toyota investing heavily into EV infrastructure would effectively be throwing away their hybrid advantage.
View on Reddit #57158061

REU512@reddit

the upcoming CHR BEV will do 0-60 in 5 seconds refreshed Lexus RZ 550e can do 0-60 in 4.1 seconds upcoming 2026 bz4x can do 0-60 in 4.9 seconds additionally, all of these models will charge from 10% to 80% in 30 minutes BZ4X and CHR both start below 40,000 MSRP before incentives who is making excuses?
View on Reddit #56922961

Nyxlo@reddit

What kind of logic is that? Volvo EX30 does 0-60 in 3.4 seconds and charges 10-80% in under 30 min, and costs 46k, does that mean Volvo is the best EV maker?
View on Reddit #56933362

REU512@reddit

I'd say that sounds like Volvo is a pretty competitive EV company... why are the vehicles I listed not competitive enough for you and what would make them competitive?
View on Reddit #56933598

stav_and_nick@reddit

\>“There’s a good chance the 2026 Toyota RAV4 is going to be greener than the F-150 Lightning. \[…\] if every non-hybrid 2024 RAV4 were a hybrid, we’d be saving in the ballpark of 25.6 million gallons of fuel every year. That’s equivalent to around 35,583 F-150 Lightnings replacing the same number of 3.5-liter Ecoboost 4WD F-150s Am I the only one that doesn't understand this logic? Am I stupid? So hybridizing *every single rav4* sold in 2024, which google says is 475,193 (let's just round it to 475k to make it easier) would be equivalent to selling only \~35,000 EV F-150s? Even if you assume that half of rav4s were hybrid (I think it's around that), that means 200,000 hybrid sales = 35,000 EV sales. Now the EV F-150 is kinda shit, but I have a feeling that increasing from 35k sales a year isn't \*that\* difficult, especially since the GM EV trucks seem pretty good Not that I think a reduction isn't good; get a hybrid, get an EV, get a gas sipper ICE, whatever. But it seems like it'd be easier to double 30k than 200k?
View on Reddit #56900105

hotbuilder@reddit

It's an incredible stretch and basically just an insane cope to justify a clickbait headline. 
View on Reddit #56901294

toomanyxjs@reddit

Hi, I'm the editor at The Autopian. Appreciate the feedback, though we're obviously not in the business of writing clickbaint/copes. This story is simply pointing out that Toyota going all-hybrid is a BIG DEAL, and counter to what some might think, that move might have a bigger environmental impact then Ford investing billions on a new BEV pickup, and much of this has to do with the ability of Toyota to sell a hybrid to the masses. Rifthunter's interpretation of the article below is correct: >"The RAV4 sells in large enough numbers that making them all hybrid will have a bigger impact on fuel savings than Ford selling the F150 Lightning while also selling other non-hybrid trims. ...\[With a BEV\]...the market share is smaller, and the vehicle prices are higher. If a recession hits, Toyota can still sell a RAV4 for $40k but Ford will be stuck with thin margins on a pricey truck. This is currently playing out in the market even with ICE vehicles." Perhaps the headline should have just said "Why The Toyota Rav4 Going Hybrid Is A Bigger Deal Than You Think" or some such. In any case, we're always looking to improve, and we appreciate your feedback.
View on Reddit #56965474

SquishyComet@reddit

I will say this as someone who works in energy analytics that there’s an EV can’t necessarily claim “zero” emissions as it’s technically charging from whatever the generation mix on the grid is at a given time. If you take the mix (gas, nuke, coal, etc) at the time of charging, you can assign it a marginal carbon intensity value, essentially what is the carbon cost to produce the additional kw’s required to fill the battery. In theory, you could make an argument that the RAV4 fleet is “greener” than the Lightning fleet, but those numbers may not work and it would likely be a function of the number of cars rather than the actual emissions. Definitely a sensationalist headline but the trade off of hybrid vs EV under changing grid conditions is certainly an ongoing conversation
View on Reddit #56903947

Splenda@reddit

Yes, but...electrical generation emissions per kWh are dropping, and nearly 90% of new generation is renewable. Cleaning up electricity generation is some of the lowest hanging fruit for reducing carbon emissions. In my area most electricity is from non-fossil sources, and places like this are spreading fast, making EVs steadily cleaner.
View on Reddit #56934785

CorrectCombination11@reddit

Even if a EV charges from a coal plant, the plant will average high efficiency with converting burning to miles than a gasoline engine, wouldn't it?
View on Reddit #56904797

SquishyComet@reddit

The EV wouldn’t technically charge from a coal plant directly, they would charge from the electric distribution system (the grid) which is powered by a mix of different generators, which come on an offline throughout the day depending on demand. Charging at a higher demand time (usually 6-9pm) then there’s typically a higher carbon intensity. Charging at a lower demand like overnight or middle of the day when solar power output is high would have a lower carbon intensity.
View on Reddit #56906383

CorrectCombination11@reddit

I don't think that answered my question. Your answer answered the question "what time of use would be best for the grid."
View on Reddit #56907894

SquishyComet@reddit

sorry I was a little confused by your phrasing. If I’m understanding correctly this should answer your question on the efficiency difference. For carbon emissions, all else being equal. Coal ~900–1,100 g CO₂/kWh Gasoline ~600–750 g CO₂/kWh Energy Density by Mass Coal (bituminous) ~24 MJ/kg Gasoline ~44 MJ/kg Coal is generally considered a highly pollutive and lesser density energy resource.
View on Reddit #56908323

CorrectCombination11@reddit

Oo those are nice units. Now if someone can turn those into distance units per energy units than we can have a proper comparison :) 
View on Reddit #56908619

strongmanass@reddit

Average EV efficiency is about 3 miles per kWh.
View on Reddit #56910739

jroller@reddit

Ya, "There's a good chance" are weasel words to say: 50% chance that 200k hybrids will save as much aggregate carbon as 35k F-150 EVs. The RAV4 Prime is the model with about the same sales as the Lightning. These two seem pretty good for avoiding the gas pump. It'd be good to see more of them both.
View on Reddit #56926919

RiftHunter4@reddit

It's not Complicated. The RAV4 sells in large enough numbers that making them all hybrid will have a bigger impact on fuel savings than Ford selling the F150 Lightning while also selling other non-hybrid trims. >But it seems like it'd be easier to double 30k than 200k? Not with an EV. the operating costs are higher, the market share is smaller, and the vehicle prices are higher. If a recession hits, Toyota can still sell a RAV4 for $40k but Ford will be stuck with thin margins on a pricey truck. This is currently playing out in the market even with ICE vehicles. Granted, there's no major conclusion to any of this. All of the manufacturers are trying to make whatever Hybrids they can already. It just shows that we'd get benefits if Ford makes more hybrid F150's.
View on Reddit #56905228

pursuer_of_simurg@reddit

Especially as EVs are like one fourth of every new car sold worldwide right now.
View on Reddit #56901915

whitevwjetta@reddit

what an utterly garbage article this is
View on Reddit #56955485

Logitech4873@reddit

The f-150 lightning is barely sold anywhere, it's irrelevant to the global environment. 
View on Reddit #56943678

Ok-Improvement-3670@reddit

Stupid headline
View on Reddit #56902075

AutoModerator@reddit

It looks like you're posting about a currently popular topic. Your submission has been automatically removed and forwarded to moderators for review. **If** your post is about Tesla or Olympian, please see [this thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/cars/comments/9bjyvb/a_new_approach_to_teslamuskelectric_vehicle/) for details. See r/TeslaMotors and r/RealTesla for indepth discussion. Want to prognosticate about car prices? Head on over [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/askcarsales/). **YES, WE WILL REVIEW YOUR POST AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. NO, YOU ARE NOT ON A BLACKLIST.** You do not need to send us modmail immediately. Your call is very important to us and will be answered in the order it was received. No, seriously, we're all volunteers. We'll get to it as soon as possible. In the meantime, please check r/cars/new to see if there is a discussion already underway. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
View on Reddit #56892686