Select Eligible Toyota Dealers [
Dealer Locator] located in
Los Angeles / San Francisco, California are offering to
Qualifying Customers: 2021 Toyota Mirai Hydrogen Fuel Cell Car + $15,000 in Complimentary Fuel for 2yrs with
0% APR for 72-Months for as low as
$23,108 after Incentives and Tax Credits. Pricing and availability may vary depending on your location, consult your local eligible dealership for more information.
- Note: Offer is valid at select participating Los Angeles / San Francisco, California locations only. Refer to the forum thread for additional deal details and discussion.
Thank to community member
ExtremeOak for and reddit user
XIIXOO for finding this deal.
Deal Details:
- Visit your local eligible Toyota Norcal Dealer [Dealer Locator]
- Shop for a eligible 2021 Toyota Mirai model that qualifies for the TFS Cash offer and Fuel Card offer mentioned on the page here
- Note: Qualified buyers can finance a new 2021 Mirai at 0% APR for 72 Months.
- Apply for and purchase a qualifying model with prices starting from ~$50,408 (may vary by location)
- Toyota Cash Discount will deduct $20,000 from your total
- You will receive a $4,500 CA Tax Credit (more info)
- You will receive a $8,000 Federal Tax Credit (more info)
- You will also receive a Complimentary Fuel Card valid for up to 2 years or $15,000 of fuel (more info)
- Your total after incentives and tax credits will be as low as $23,108 and will vary depending on your location and model selection.
Additional Details:
Leave a Comment
Top Comments
"The income cap applies for all eligible vehicle types except fuel-cell electric vehicles."
Source: cleanvehiclerebate.org/eng/requirements/1470
1,302 Comments
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
Many of the people who say hydrogen doesn't work don't even realize Tesla doesn't even make their own batteries lol.
nothing to do with lack of infrastructure investment, 5 years of shitty design & insane MSRP. Ford sold more Mach E in Feb than Toyota sold Mirai in US for 2 years. Stop comparing solely to Tesla. Toyota in last place across board here.
If as people predict, electricity from renewables becomes cheaper than fossil fuels, then it will also become cheaper to produce hydrogen via electrolysis of water than from fossil fuels. IOW, if you're going to condemn hydrogen fuel cell cars since hydrogen is mostly made from fossil fuels, then to remain logically consistent you also need to condemn EVs since electricity is also mostly made from fossil fuels. If/when the green revolution happens and renewables become cheaper than fossil fuels, then both will simultaneously become fossil fuel-free.
There were efficiency reasons to condemn hydrogen in the past, when electrolysis involved putting metal plates in water and running electricity through them. That had a peak theoretical efficiency of about 65%, and was closer to 30%-40% efficient in practice. And once you factored in all efficiency losses, that made hydrogen fuel cell vehicles less efficient than gasoline ICE vehicles.
But PEM electrolysis is hitting 65%-70% efficiency today, and expected to increase to over 80% in the next decade. Its theoretical max is about 94% efficient. So although hydrogen currently lags EVs and diesel ICE vehicles in efficiency right now, it has the potential to surpass them.
- About 60% of electricity in the U.S. is made from fossil fuels with about 50% efficiency, for an overall efficiency of 70% (if you call renewables and nuclear 100% efficient). Transmission over power lines is about 95% efficient. Battery charging efficiency is about 85%. I haven't found numbers but I assume battery discharging efficiency is about the same since it's the same chemical process in reverse. And electric motor efficiency is about 90%. For an overall EV efficiency of 43% at present.
- That's about the same efficiency as for diesel cars and buses. (Diesel tractor trailers on long haul routes are up around 50% efficient. Ships can hit 60%.)
- Hydrogen works out to 70% efficiency for the electricity, 70% efficiency to produce the hydrogen, 70% efficiency at the fuel cell, 90% efficiency for the electric motor. For an overall hydrogen car efficiency of 31%.
- If you adjust this for electrolysis and fuel cells potentially hitting 85% efficiency in the near future, then hydrogen becomes 46% efficient.
- Gasoline cars are commonly quoted as being about 25% efficient. Though some of the numbers I've been calculating for recent models put them closer to 30%.
You have to understand that when you generate hydrogen via electrolysis, the hydrogen is basically being used as a battery. You store energy in hydrogen via electrolysis, and extract it via a fuel cell. It's functionally no different than a BEV battery which also stores the electricity via a chemical change (albeit an electrochemical change). Just that hydrogen uses an open loop (the water exhaust is released into the environment, and water acquired from the environment is converted into hydrogen), while an electrical battery uses a closed loop (the anode and cathode remain inside the battery pack).From an efficiency standpoint, the winner between hydrogen and BEVs comes down to which chemical process can hit higher efficiencies. And right now, hydrogen is improving efficiency a lot quicker than batteries. Mechanically, hydrogen has more difficulties with transportation and storage, but doesn't have the recharging time problem that electrical batteries do. (And the fact that it's open loop gives it a substantial weight advantage over batteries, which may become important as we try to convert aircraft to electric. Right now if you try to install enough batteries to maintain an airliner's range with aviation fuel, the batteries alone will exceed the plane's maximum take-off weight by a substantial margin.) It's too early to call one the winner. And there may in fact be enough room in the market for both (I dunno why so many people are obsessed with "their" favored horse being the one and only winner).
(You may notice that both EV and hydrogen efficiency increase (finally surpassing diesel) if we can increase the efficiency of electricity generation. I've been saying this for over a decade now. The push for EVs is putting the cart before the horse. Since we use about 3x more electricity right now than all our cars would use if switched to electric, converting our electricity generation to renewables and nuclear first would yield quicker and greater payback than converting to EVs while the majority of our electricity is still produced by fossil fuels. People are too concerned about being green in ways that are immediately visible and they can show off to their neighbors, not enough about ways which aren't as visible but yield the biggest improvements.)
CA - I spoke to the rep and she suggest you apply for the BEV rebate first then apply for the FCEV to be certain. FCEV is the exception
FED - There is no per year or liftetime limit. I am guessing this is how Dealerships get to keep this tax credit from leases. The dealership gets these tax credits whenever people leases.
As it stands, each industry, company, and interest pursue what they think will succeed. Most companies choose the easier proven route of BEVs. Toyota has the luxury to diversify it's technology and portfolio.
I am rooting for all companies including Tesla, GM, Ford, Honda, Toyota, etc. to succeed in investing in R&D to push these technologies forward. The automobile and other vehicle market is massive and the need to replace ICE is the one thing that is guaranteed while the different technology applications is not assured.
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
Many of the people who say hydrogen doesn't work don't even realize Tesla doesn't even make their own batteries lol.
It's even less credible than saying Apple doesn't make iPhones because they license the ARM architecture, Samsung fabs their chips, and Foxconn builds a lot of the rest.
If as people predict, electricity from renewables becomes cheaper than fossil fuels, then it will also become cheaper to produce hydrogen via electrolysis of water than from fossil fuels. IOW, if you're going to condemn hydrogen fuel cell cars since hydrogen is mostly made from fossil fuels, then to remain logically consistent you also need to condemn EVs since electricity is also mostly made from fossil fuels. If/when the green revolution happens and renewables become cheaper than fossil fuels, then both will simultaneously become fossil fuel-free.
There were efficiency reasons to condemn hydrogen in the past, when electrolysis involved putting metal plates in water and running electricity through them. That had a peak theoretical efficiency of about 65%, and was closer to 30%-40% efficient in practice. And once you factored in all efficiency losses, that made hydrogen fuel cell vehicles less efficient than gasoline ICE vehicles.
But PEM electrolysis is hitting 65%-70% efficiency today, and expected to increase to over 80% in the next decade. Its theoretical max is about 94% efficient. So although hydrogen currently lags EVs and diesel ICE vehicles in efficiency right now, it has the potential to surpass them.
- About 60% of electricity in the U.S. is made from fossil fuels with about 50% efficiency, for an overall efficiency of 70% (if you call renewables and nuclear 100% efficient). Transmission over power lines is about 95% efficient. Battery charging efficiency is about 85%. I haven't found numbers but I assume battery discharging efficiency is about the same since it's the same chemical process in reverse. And electric motor efficiency is about 90%. For an overall EV efficiency of 43% at present.
- That's about the same efficiency as for diesel cars and buses. (Diesel tractor trailers on long haul routes are up around 50% efficient. Ships can hit 60%.)
- Hydrogen works out to 70% efficiency for the electricity, 70% efficiency to produce the hydrogen, 70% efficiency at the fuel cell, 90% efficiency for the electric motor. For an overall hydrogen car efficiency of 31%.
- If you adjust this for electrolysis and fuel cells potentially hitting 85% efficiency in the near future, then hydrogen becomes 46% efficient.
- Gasoline cars are commonly quoted as being about 25% efficient. Though some of the numbers I've been calculating for recent models put them closer to 30%.
You have to understand that when you generate hydrogen via electrolysis, the hydrogen is basically being used as a battery. You store energy in hydrogen via electrolysis, and extract it via a fuel cell. It's functionally no different than a BEV battery which also stores the electricity via a chemical change (albeit an electrochemical change). Just that hydrogen uses an open loop (the water exhaust is released into the environment, and water acquired from the environment is converted into hydrogen), while an electrical battery uses a closed loop (the anode and cathode remain inside the battery pack).From an efficiency standpoint, the winner between hydrogen and BEVs comes down to which chemical process can hit higher efficiencies. And right now, hydrogen is improving efficiency a lot quicker than batteries. Mechanically, hydrogen has more difficulties with transportation and storage, but doesn't have the recharging time problem that electrical batteries do. (And the fact that it's open loop gives it a substantial weight advantage over batteries, which may become important as we try to convert aircraft to electric. Right now if you try to install enough batteries to maintain an airliner's range with aviation fuel, the batteries alone will exceed the plane's maximum take-off weight by a substantial margin.) It's too early to call one the winner. And there may in fact be enough room in the market for both (I dunno why so many people are obsessed with "their" favored horse being the one and only winner).
(You may notice that both EV and hydrogen efficiency increase (finally surpassing diesel) if we can increase the efficiency of electricity generation. I've been saying this for over a decade now. The push for EVs is putting the cart before the horse. Since we use about 3x more electricity right now than all our cars would use if switched to electric, converting our electricity generation to renewables and nuclear first would yield quicker and greater payback than converting to EVs while the majority of our electricity is still produced by fossil fuels. People are too concerned about being green in ways that are immediately visible and they can show off to their neighbors, not enough about ways which aren't as visible but yield the biggest improvements.)
However, you conveniently ignored the large efficiency cost of transporting and distributing compressed hydrogen to stations. That alone would knock it down to about 64% as efficient compared to BEVs - now you're looking at 64mpge vs. 100mpge. Not to mention the investment in creating those stations to begin with, manning them, and having people go out of their way to drive to those stations.
BEVs can be charged at home and already have a massive head start in charging stations on the road, which cost a pittance to set up compared to a hydrogen station and require minimal maintenance.
Even with PEM electrolysis at home, in-vehicle or with a small in-home station, the efficiency cost is big.
In that case, energy still comes from the grid (you also ignored that 5% efficiency loss in your calculations), and we are not remotely close to 94% PEM electrolysis efficiency or 85% fuel cell efficiency. The theoretical max is actually more like 90% and 83%, and then we are still talking over a decade of progress and a hopeful breakthrough or two and a huge investment in electrolysis infrastructure and materials. In practice right now HFCs in vehicles don't even hit 70% efficiency anyway.
So at best, in a decade or two, we might see something close to parity with our 2021 lithium tech, after a huge investment in infrastructure, manufacturing and R&D.
Even then, you also have to take into account that the HFC lifecycle is far shorter than the lithium lifecycle, which is another big disadvantage for consumers. Even current lithium tech can last the lifetime of the car (15-20 years / 250,000-300,000 miles) with the majority of the capacity intact. HFCs are seeing half of that lifespan, or less, in practice. You would have to just hope for a breakthrough to change that.
I honestly expect that the hydrogen for these Mirais will be being transported to the last few pumps in CA by BEV trucks.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/n...r-BB1eQMJ1
If as people predict, electricity from renewables becomes cheaper than fossil fuels, then it will also become cheaper to produce hydrogen via electrolysis of water than from fossil fuels. IOW, if you're going to condemn hydrogen fuel cell cars since hydrogen is mostly made from fossil fuels, then to remain logically consistent you also need to condemn EVs since electricity is also mostly made from fossil fuels. If/when the green revolution happens and renewables become cheaper than fossil fuels, then both will simultaneously become fossil fuel-free.
There were efficiency reasons to condemn hydrogen in the past, when electrolysis involved putting metal plates in water and running electricity through them. That had a peak theoretical efficiency of about 65%, and was closer to 30%-40% efficient in practice. And once you factored in all efficiency losses, that made hydrogen fuel cell vehicles less efficient than gasoline ICE vehicles.
But PEM electrolysis is hitting 65%-70% efficiency today, and expected to increase to over 80% in the next decade. Its theoretical max is about 94% efficient. So although hydrogen currently lags EVs and diesel ICE vehicles in efficiency right now, it has the potential to surpass them.
- About 60% of electricity in the U.S. is made from fossil fuels with about 50% efficiency, for an overall efficiency of 70% (if you call renewables and nuclear 100% efficient). Transmission over power lines is about 95% efficient. Battery charging efficiency is about 85%. I haven't found numbers but I assume battery discharging efficiency is about the same since it's the same chemical process in reverse. And electric motor efficiency is about 90%. For an overall EV efficiency of 43% at present.
- That's about the same efficiency as for diesel cars and buses. (Diesel tractor trailers on long haul routes are up around 50% efficient. Ships can hit 60%.)
- Hydrogen works out to 70% efficiency for the electricity, 70% efficiency to produce the hydrogen, 70% efficiency at the fuel cell, 90% efficiency for the electric motor. For an overall hydrogen car efficiency of 31%.
- If you adjust this for electrolysis and fuel cells potentially hitting 85% efficiency in the near future, then hydrogen becomes 46% efficient.
- Gasoline cars are commonly quoted as being about 25% efficient. Though some of the numbers I've been calculating for recent models put them closer to 30%.
You have to understand that when you generate hydrogen via electrolysis, the hydrogen is basically being used as a battery. You store energy in hydrogen via electrolysis, and extract it via a fuel cell. It's functionally no different than a BEV battery which also stores the electricity via a chemical change (albeit an electrochemical change). Just that hydrogen uses an open loop (the water exhaust is released into the environment, and water acquired from the environment is converted into hydrogen), while an electrical battery uses a closed loop (the anode and cathode remain inside the battery pack).From an efficiency standpoint, the winner between hydrogen and BEVs comes down to which chemical process can hit higher efficiencies. And right now, hydrogen is improving efficiency a lot quicker than batteries. Mechanically, hydrogen has more difficulties with transportation and storage, but doesn't have the recharging time problem that electrical batteries do. (And the fact that it's open loop gives it a substantial weight advantage over batteries, which may become important as we try to convert aircraft to electric. Right now if you try to install enough batteries to maintain an airliner's range with aviation fuel, the batteries alone will exceed the plane's maximum take-off weight by a substantial margin.) It's too early to call one the winner. And there may in fact be enough room in the market for both (I dunno why so many people are obsessed with "their" favored horse being the one and only winner).
(You may notice that both EV and hydrogen efficiency increase (finally surpassing diesel) if we can increase the efficiency of electricity generation. I've been saying this for over a decade now. The push for EVs is putting the cart before the horse. Since we use about 3x more electricity right now than all our cars would use if switched to electric, converting our electricity generation to renewables and nuclear first would yield quicker and greater payback than converting to EVs while the majority of our electricity is still produced by fossil fuels. People are too concerned about being green in ways that are immediately visible and they can show off to their neighbors, not enough about ways which aren't as visible but yield the biggest improvements.)
I purchased an EV in 2019 and claimed both credits before. Perhaps the credits are per vehicle instead of household?
Federal credits are per vehicle. You can take 10 if you buy 10 qualifying cars (and have enough tax liability for 10)
CA is a bit more complex- it's only one per person (or business) but there's some exceptions depending what you bought when-
https://cleanvehiclereb
Individual and business applicants are not eligible to receive more than one CVRP rebate either via direct purchase and/or lease as of December 3, 2019. Applicants who have not already met their rebate limit prior to December 3, 2019, will be eligible for one additional rebate. Those that have already met their two-rebate limit will remain ineligible for an additional rebate. Individuals or businesses that have met the rebate limit with non-fuel cell vehicles may apply for one additional rebate for an eligible fuel cell vehicle. This fuel cell vehicle exception does not apply to Rebate Now applications.
Traditional rental and car share fleets are subject to limits of 20 rebates per calendar year. Public fleets are limited to 30 rebates per calendar year.
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
One reason many don't realize that is it's factually untrue.
Certainly they get the majority of their batteries from 3rd parties right now, but they absolutely make their own as well
And are currently working to vastly scale up their own production, while also scaling up 3rd party purchases, because like all BEV makers, they are battery constrained in the face of larger demand than they can supply cars.
Same reason GM is building a joint battery factory right now with another already on the drawing board.... and same reason VW just announced plans for a number of battery factories as well.
Toyota has the opposite problem with their fuel cell boondoggle- more cars than demand...hence why they're practically giving them away at this point.
Leave a Comment