By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Seems to me that a reasonable solution would be to continue improving and selling the existing Hybrid architecture/design but allow consumers to select a Plug-in as an additional cost option. Getting the option from the manufacturer would also alleviate any concerns regarding loss of warranty.
There is also concern that the plug-in batteries would take additional space and weight. It also seems to me that there is a lot of space available in the spare tire well. If a vehicle was changed to use run-flat tires, weight would be saved and additional space would be made available Since the latest technology of Lithium Ion batteries allows for much greater power density, lower weight, and smaller size, perhaps it won't be too much of a weight space trade off to support a 50 mile EV only commute.
Well it was never in the automaker's financial best interest to make hybrids to begin with. Modifying a hybrid to give it plug-in capability is trivial compared to the modifications required to incorporate hybrid technology into a conventional vehicle. The new Tesla Roadster can go 250 miles on a 900 lb battery pack. The battery pack on a Toyota Prius weighs just over 100 lbs. I believe that it is possible to deliver 30 miles of all electric driving range without increasing the weight of a Prius by more than 200 lbs. What would the additional cost be? I'd guess around $3000. People are currently paying around a $3000 premium for a Prius, which essentially gets them 10 mpg over a Corolla. Why wouldn't some pay an additional $3000 for a 40 mpg increase? That's not taking into consideration what the government might offer in terms of incentives.
My guess for 200 lbs of Li-Ion batteries would be at least $10,000. Has CalCars gotten their PHEV upgrade below $12k?
The additional cost is almost entirely due to the batteries. The raw materials for these batteries are not expensive, its the manufacturing process. That's where the greatest gains can be made in lowering prices.
The Zap Xebra is coming soon to Cali. Check google news and see the story. Supposed to sell for about $9K.
Git ya one Gary !!!
Cool. I could go for the Xebra PK. I signed up for the news letter and a test drive. I like it. That would be perfect for 90% of my daily trips to the store etc.
http://www.zapworld.com/cars/xebrapk.asp
My problem with lithium ion batteries is reliability. I just went to use a laptop that I rarely use. It is a Dell that I had bought a new battery for in January. The original battery lasted about a year. The new battery is completely dead and will not take a charge. I called Dell and they were kind enough to extend the normal 90 day warranty. I am now on my third battery for that laptop. I have a 6 year old Dell laptop that is still going with the original NiMH battery.
The company building the Tesla will not survive if they have to replace cells on a regular basis.
Lithium batteries are an old technology yet still have serious problems. First used in 1912.
A unique drawback of the Li-ion battery is that its life span is dependent upon aging from time of manufacturing (shelf life) regardless of whether it was charged, and not just on the number of charge/discharge cycles. This drawback is not widely publicized.
At a 100% charge level, a typical Li-ion laptop battery that's full most of the time at 25 degrees Celsius, will irreversibly lose approximately 20% capacity per year. This capacity loss begins from the time it was manufactured, and occurs even when the battery is unused. Different storage temperatures produce different loss results: 6% loss at 0 °C, 20% at 25 °C, and 35% at 40 °C. When stored at 40% charge level, these figures are reduced to 2%, 4%, 15% at 0, 25 and 40 degrees Celsius respectively.
If the battery is used and fully depleted to 0%, this is called a "deep discharge" cycle, and this decreases its capacity. Approximately 100 deep discharge cycles leave the battery with about 75% to 85% capacity. When used in laptop computers or cellular phones, this rate of deterioration means that after three to five years the battery will have capacities that are too low to be usable.
Li-ion batteries are not as durable as nickel metal hydride or nickel-cadmium designs and can be extremely dangerous if mistreated. They are usually more expensive.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium_ion_battery
I would think that for a lot of us, that a Plug-in Prius with a primary motivation of electric only (for me I would like to have a 50-70 mile EV only mode), with a smaller engine to maintain charge for extended driving, would be just about ideal.
Correct as far as stated! But incorrect if you consider the requirements necessary to generate, distribute and store the electricity necessary to power the electric drive motor.
Power to the People,
MidCow
Godspeed Tesla, et al...work those bugs out.
You are absolutely right and that was my point; maybe I made it too subtle.
The oil/gas refineries already exist. The transport structure for oil/gas already exists; pipelines, gas tanker trucks. Local gas stations exist and are everywhere; you can drive almost anywhere from anywhere and not worry about finding a gas station to refill your car. And you can refill you car in 5-10 minutes.
My point is that the infrastructure does not exist for electric cars and it will take a considerable amount of time and thought before it can be put in place. To economocally justify the infrastructure elctric cars will have to be ubiquitous and for electric cars to be ubiquitous then "charge stations" will have to be everywhere. the ole catch 22- chicken and egg sysndrome.
Then some new form of electric transfer will need to be developed. Overnight changing will not be acceptable! 2-3 hour charging will not be accptable. 1 hour charging might be marginally acceptable. 30 minute charging would probably be accepted. But to approach the current convience of gas/diesel fill-up of 5-10 minutes on an electric charge system does not currently exist.
So their are two major problems to overcome:
(1) "charge station" infrastructure.
(2) "charge station" recharge time.
Unitl these two problems a re solved you have a plug-in home novelty. That is why EV-1 failed in California. EV-1 was also very expensive per vechicle.
Cheers,
MidCow
I mean, some city, like Chicago, or out in the Midwest in farm country or perhaps in Denver or on Long Island?
If you claim an EV is unsuitable for your needs then I'll accept that you know better than I do what your needs are. By the same token I think that I know better than you what my needs are and an EV will definitely suffice.
But the point is sales, isn't it? People wanting to buy the technology, and being confident in it? Being suitable for a very large segment, not a small one?
While I would certainly buy one, I can afford to do so with no sacrifice whatsoever. The average family cannot easily afford to pile Mom, Dad and two or three kids onto an airplane for two out of town trips a year. And studies show they make double that at least. I live in a rural area as well, some 60 miles outside Reno. Between here and there, there is nothing.
I've lived in DC. Foggy Bottom area. Typically I would drive out to the Manassas area, perhaps Fredrickburg, etc. Doing that can bring a person over 100 miles, round trip.
Someone living in LA, venturing to Orange County for shopping or whatever, that is a common thing there. That is over 100 miles round-trip.
So, it all comes down to the infrastructure being there to recharge at will, and quickly, no waiting for 60 or 30 minutes, or even newer technology, one not here yet, before anything but true technofiles will buy it in numbers to support its marketing. People in NYC/Chicago/Boston/DC will have no need for such a car, as they have dependable public transportation they are used to using....
I am not down on the technology, but please understand that most people just seem to drive longer distances, in a shorter amount of time than you seem to be.
Or .047 gas stations per square mile or worst cast 1 gas station per 21 square miles. Assuming a square this is 4.58 miles per side anbd worst case distance is 1 /square root of 2 or 3.23 miles.
You dont have to plan where you are going in a car by looking at avaialble gas stationsa. There are everywhere; i.e. ubiquitous. Ekectric recharge stations will not be so plentiful for a long, long time if ever.
What is you charge is running low on your EV? Waht is you forgot to recharge last night? You said the only palce the recharging stations need to be is interstate or major highwya. Let's just consider that statemnt; do you realize how many miles of interstate and major highways there are? 42 million miles. Every 200 miles would be 210,000 Wah thats more that the number of gas stations. let's just say there are only 10,000 needed if they are strategically placed. Let's say they cost $5 million each and that the intial research to develop quick cahrge is $2 Billion.
Total cost to put in a minimal EV infrastructure together= 10,000*5,000,000 + $2,000,000,000 = $52 Billion
Who is going to pay the $52,000,000,000 ??
YCMV,
MidCow
Or .047 gas stations per square mile or worst cast 1 gas station per 21 square miles. Assuming a square this is 4.58 miles per side and worst case distance is 1 /square root of 2 or 3.23 miles."
Is what he said. Then he moved on to another equation, that if you cut those numbers, and spaced the re charging stations 200 miles apart, you would need 210,000 of them, given there are 42,000,000 miles of Interstate and major highways.
Always happy to help you out.
While I certainly haven't driven every interstate and highway in this country I can tell you from my experience that I've never gone 200 miles without seeing a gas station. So the claim that positioning a charging station every 200 miles would result in more charging stations than gas stations seems completely bogus.
Here's the deal. The US interstate system is 46,726 miles. It is part of the National Highway system, which is 160,000. This is what I was refering to by major highways. And I stand by my assertion that on long trips you will almost certainly be using one of these roadways. Positioning a charging station every 100 miles would only require 1,600 stations. Around 1% of the number of gas stations that currently exist. Clearly there is a difference of opinion in what constitutes a major highway because the 42,000,000 mile figure represents another 41,840,000 miles that aren't part of this system.
Undoubtedly the personal injury shysters will become involved, reaping huge settlements from the use of high-voltage electricity near flammable gasoline, and all of that BS. There is just so much more to doing what is needed.
It's true that the infrastructure for delivering gasoline is already in place but it still continues to cost a considerable amount of money. OPEC plans on spending 100 billion over the next 10 years to increase production. These pipelines need periodic maintenance. The 20 oil tankers we empty everyday probably have considerable overhead. I just read that Chevron discovered a new oil field in the Gulf of Mexico. Its 175 miles offshore and they had to drill 28,000'. That can't possibly be cheap. The contortions we are willing to go through to keep burning oil are truly amazing. While I question this 52 billion dollar cost for building charging stations it actually seems rather cheap when things are put into perspective.
Wow. You need to go out to the western US.
Your post makes no sense
1) There is already an electrical infrastructure here in the US.
2) The point of plug-in hybrids is they don't NEED a plug. They'll just save more gas if you have one.
I definitely think there are some urban users here, I work at Rural Public Water District in NEMO, (aka PWSD.) We have 650 miles of water line along 1200 miles of road in our district, we have three Gas stations. There are areas -far- more rural than this around. Just some local facts for me.
You and I both know that most folks will charge their EV at home. It is the cheapest way to do it. Honda is selling a good amount of CNG Civics in spite of the fact that there are only a hand full of places to get CNG. They are installing a $4000 device in their garage to fill up their car over night. The GX has a range of less than 200 miles also. An EV will appeal to a lot of folks when they are made available to the buying public. I would look seriously at one. I would not even consider a hybrid after knowing what I now know. Seemed like a good idea to start.
Car 1=plug-in hybrid. We drive this the 5 stop-and-go miles to wal-mart and don't burn any gas in the process.
Car 2=bmw 335i/porsche boxster. We take this on one thousand+ mile road trips where we can blitz up the rockies.
No dichotomy is required.
The Tesla achieves 4 second 0-60 times with just one electric motor powering the rear wheels. It could be made as an all wheel drive with either 2 or 4 motors. At that point nothing could touch it from an acceleration perspective. While battery packs are heavy there is some freedom in where you can place them to achieve best weight distribution and handling. Supposedly the RAV4 EV handled better than the ICE version due to its lower center of gravity. Another nice thing about electric motors is that more power equates to better efficiency. Definitely not the case with ICEs.
These people would have a larger car to travel in Lexus LS460 or Mercede E350.
Most people, i know wouldn't combine a minimal car with good mileage with a luxury/sports car.
I think the EV based on economy and lack of features would be a match for a Toyota Corolla or a Honda Fit or maybe Ford 500, not a BMW or Porsche.
Could be wrong but I hust don't see EV people having a high-end second car, especailly a high-end with a small trunk.
YOMV,
MidCow
A correction. I looked up the number of interstate miles and incorrectly assumed it was in THOUSANDS not actual miles.
My figure should have bee 42,000 miles not 42 million.
Therefore every 200 miles would require only 210 charging stations.
Mea Culpa,
MidCow
So, 210 stations at $5 mil per works out to a bit over $1B.
Not quite as big of a chunk.
congrats on the mea culpa; those are pretty rare animals on these boards.....
We are talking about the new "charge stations" with the 15 minute quick charge. Similar to the currenth filling stations which have envolved to mini-marts.
LOL,
MidCow
Inner-city delivery vans do most of their work in areas where emissions are a major issue, therefore DaimlerChrysler is intensively developing alternative drive systems. Top left: Sprinter with plug-in hybrid drive undergoing trials in North America. Top right: Fuel Cell Sprinter also undergoing trials in the USA at United Parcel Service. Bottom left: Canter with hybrid drive entered series production:
Diesel plugin hybrid
This is where the new Li-ion chemistries developed by Altairnano and A123 Systems become more attractive. They are supposedly capable of 10,000 cycles while still maintaining 85% of their original storage capacity. While these batteries don't have the energy density of the Li-ion batteries you would find in a laptop their greater cycle life should make them ideally suited for this plug-in application. In addition their higher power density and faster recharge/discharge times will allow them to provide greater acceleration and regenerative braking capability.