Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Hybrid Vehicles Hybrid Vehicles - Archived Discussions Plug-in Hybrids 
330 messages, Last post on Nov 13, 2008 at 12:13 PM
You are in the Hybrid Vehicles - Archived Discussions Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer
This discussion is ARCHIVED. To reactivate the discussion, post a request in the Lost? Ask the Hybrids Host for directions! discussion.
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: tpe (Jan 10, 2007 7:45 pm) If batteries keep improving, getting cheaper and charging becomes faster...somewhere around the 300 mile range the ICE will no longer be needed. Hey, where did all the nay-sayers go? 
|
|
|
Replying to: reddroverr (Jan 10, 2007 7:58 pm)  Rocky
|
|
|
Toyota's Winter Hybrid newsletter has a discussion on plugin hybrids and Toyota's thinking: http://www.toyota.com/html/hybridsynergyview/2007/winter/plugin.html Check out the concept hybrid sports car in the same issue... |
|
|
Toyota's Winter Hybrid newsletter has a discussion on plugin hybrids and Toyota's thinking: http://www.toyota.com/html/hybridsynergyview/2007/winter/plugin.html Check out the concept hybrid sports car in the same issue... |
|
|
Replying to: rockylee (Jan 30, 2007 12:12 pm) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (May 25, 2006 5:34 am) The problem with it and with the similar vehicles from the other car companies was that each EV they sold at the time was a 15 - 30k loss (depending on company and batteyr chemistry) to the car company for the expensive battery packs. They were selling them to satisfy legal requirements which were eventually lifted. Remember that these are companies - why would any company sell a product for a loss equal to the selling price? Is there a historical example where any company has ever done that en mass? Right now I think the only active RAV4EVs still around are the fleet ones, varius government agencies bought many of them and used them. Very very few private sales, although there were a few. I don't have any actual info from the last few years of if they are still in use, but as of 2001 or so they were doing great - and that was already several years into it! In general the idea is that there is no oil-conspiracy (as much as that might be fun or interesting), it really does come down to 'the batteries cost too much'. And in the late 90's, there was the concept that the batteries would have to be replaced at 40-50k miles if they were being used in a deep-discharge pattern regularly in order to hit a 100k lifespan for the vehicle. So ---- the idea amongst environmentalists within the industry was to create more of a market for EV batteries through Hybrid's which were more immediatedly deliverable, get some economies of scale going, and create more reasonable prices on the batteries, then come back to the EVs in 5, 10, or 15 years BOTH when a) the costs came down through use in Hybrids and b) the techonologies improved. I still stay in some contact with the people I worked with and the progress is extremely slow. The batteries still really aren't that fundamentally different than in 1920... And nothing major, as far as I know, took place in the last 5-10 years in terms of pure research. The growth and expansions of high-performance batteries as a commodity has been awesome in terms of Hybrids creating a market. The sad fact is that with regular deep discharge of any current battery they just don't last for 100k miles... To one other comment, a PHEV with some decent range (20 miles?) and then the hybrid engine as well is definitely more utilitarian than EVs. EVs should still have a place assuming we can get decent batteries into them - even based on a coal plant they are much more efficient than an ICE. I think one calculation our company did put emissions at 99.995% less if recharged in a state with a 50% coal/non coal gen mix. You can't compare generating power at the 80 - 300 hp level to the efficiencies you can get at 100 - 600,000 kW! Any comparison is really just laughable when you get all the facts on that one. Including power transmission losses, etc. And it is easier for a state to upgrade power plants and all of a sudden all cars are 'updated' to new greener standards when/if that happens versus entire metropolitan areas having everyone buy a new car. Putting new/better scrubbers on coal plants really ins't as expensive as people think compared to the emissions reduction! So, who knows - we might see the RAV4EV come back when batteries get better. If it takes too long then they might just jump to fuel cells, but in the industry fuel cells is really just a catchphrase that means 'we don't want to do anyting now, and if we talk about fuel cells but don't do anyting we think you will leave us alone'. Its a copout. I'm not saying that they aren't eventually viable, just not practical in as small an application as a car anytime soon at all. Watch for busses to start using them, and it will still be maybe 5 years before cars - especially Prius size cars, to use them. Their implementation will be: small scale energy generation (i.e, on-site generation for manufacturing or maybe municipally for 10 square city block type applications, etc.) then in the largest of vehicles like mass transit busses, and then eventually and lastly into 2000 - 3000 lb cars... And that doesn't mean you can't make concept cars that use fuel cells, and companies will continue to do that to avoid doing anyting additional, but ask them how much those cost, and when we might see them at a dealership ...
|
|
|
Replying to: lightminer (Mar 04, 2007 11:03 pm) The main present touting point of fuel cells is cleaner emissions, but in the past it was pointed out that since fuel cells are not "heat engines" their efficiency is not reduced by the thermodynamic efficiency factor for heat engines. So fuel cells which use a carbon containing fuel and which released CO2 might nevertheless release much less CO2 than an ICE and would not release any NOx or other pollutants which air breathing combustion engines produce.
|
|
|
Replying to: lightminer (Mar 04, 2007 11:03 pm) I don't know about that. In the 1920's I suspect that the only batteries available were lead acid. I'm sure this technology has improved some in the last 80 years. Li-ion batteries have energy densities over 4x that of today's lead acid. And have been improving in this aspect by about 8% per year. I'd call that a fundamental difference. I agree with you on the cost issue. Li-ion battery packs need to get down to around $300/kWh with a lifespan of 2,000 cycles/10 years before they really have broad appeal. If you believe the public statements this cost figure is attainable at a large enough scale. Whether or not the lifespan of Li-ion can be significantly improved is still up in the air.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: tpe (Mar 05, 2007 8:19 am) Oh - "If you believe the public statements" - the battery companies have to make dramatic claims about what is attainable in 1 - 2 years in order to get research dollars, because their competitors will do this. Its a vicious cycle that even they don't want to be in. They were claiming the same peformance levels in the mid 90's that they are still trying to hit and were (and still are) giving them 1-2 year time horizons! So be careful with statements about what is right around the corner... Not to say it won't all happen - it will, just mentioning some aspects to the process. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: jim314 (Mar 05, 2007 4:37 am) |
|
You are here:
Forums
Hybrid Vehicles Hybrid Vehicles - Archived Discussions Plug-in Hybrids
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Toyota Highlander Hybrid
2011 Honda Civic
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
