Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Plug-in Hybrids

24567

Comments

  • michael2003michael2003 Member Posts: 144
    There seems to be a consensus that modifying a vehicle to allow for being plugged in is not in an automakers best interest due to it's additional cost.
    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.
  • tpetpe Member Posts: 2,342
    There seems to be a consensus that modifying a vehicle to allow for being plugged in is not in an automakers best interest due to it's additional cost.

    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.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    What would the additional cost be? I'd guess around $3000

    My guess for 200 lbs of Li-Ion batteries would be at least $10,000. Has CalCars gotten their PHEV upgrade below $12k?
  • tpetpe Member Posts: 2,342
    The prices I've seen for this upgrade are between $9k and $12k. These are small companies doing the mods and I suspect that they are making a decent profit. I'm sure there is also a redunancy of effort involved that wouldn't be the case if the car was originally manufactured in this way.

    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.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    As far as I can tell they are still fighting with the overcharging problem with the Li-Ion cells. The ones used in the Tesla are I believe AA size. Anything bigger becomes hazardous when overcharged. In fact my newest Dell Laptop power adapter was recalled as it set a couple laptops on fire over charging the Lithium cells. The Tesla is cool. I think electric vehicles or plugin hybrids are for now a rich mans play thing. I would love to have an electric runabout to go to the store and back. Nothing road legal is available for me here in CA.
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    gary says - " think electric vehicles or plugin hybrids are for now a rich mans play thing. I would love to have an electric runabout to go to the store and back. Nothing road legal is available for me here in CA."

    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 !!! :D
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    The Zap Xebra is coming soon to Cali

    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
  • tpetpe Member Posts: 2,342
    Its interesting that the battery pack in the Tesla Roadster is comprised of almost 7,000 small battery cells identical to what you'd see in a laptop. From what I've read they've engineered it so that if an individual cell fails, overheats, or whatever it won't adversely effect the whole. In fact the only way you'd know it is that the onboard computer monitors these things. What's good about this is that there is a lot of R&D going into improving battery performance for small devices like laptops and cell phones. Companies like Tesla Motors are able to piggyback on this effort.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    What is even better is the designers and builders of the Tesla are doing it out of a desire to have a better car. Not like the big automakers that are only interested in the bottom line for their stockholders.

    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
  • michael2003michael2003 Member Posts: 144
    I just read some information about the Tesla, wow; looks like a very nice initial effort!

    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.
  • midnightcowboymidnightcowboy Member Posts: 1,978
    tpe said "Bottom line is that there is no close comparison between electric and ICE propulsion when it comes to energy efficiency."

    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
  • reddroverrreddroverr Member Posts: 509
    Consider the fact that oil must be refined, transported (from all corners of the world and then from the refineries to local stations) and stored as well.
  • reddroverrreddroverr Member Posts: 509
    you know, if they can work the bugs out, I would like the all electric option. It would be a far simpler machine with vastly less maintanance required. You might even be able to have a small on board gas generator..akin to a small lawnmower engine for the sole purpose of recharging when required on the fly. I am not rolling in dough, but i would consider paying well up for an electric with a 200 mile range. I don't need to go 0-60 is 4.7 seconds so hopefully we will have some more practical options soon.

    Godspeed Tesla, et al...work those bugs out.
  • midnightcowboymidnightcowboy Member Posts: 1,978
    reddroverr said: "Consider the fact that oil must be refined, transported (from all corners of the world and then from the refineries to local stations) and stored as well. "

    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
  • tpetpe Member Posts: 2,342
    I don't understand why you feel plugging in at home is unacceptable. I don't see it as being any more of an inconvenience than visiting a gas station. If my car is re-charging while I'm asleep I could care less whether it takes 5 minutes or 5 hours. If you magically started out with a full tank of gas every morning how often would you visit a gas station? If you're like most people then the answer is very rarely. With that being the case there is no need for re-charging stations on every corner because nobody would use them. On those occasions that you drove more than the range of an EV in a day chances are you were on an interstate or other major highway. That is the only place these re-charging stations need to be located.
  • terry92270terry92270 Member Posts: 1,247
    TPE, can I ask you where do you live :confuse:

    I mean, some city, like Chicago, or out in the Midwest in farm country or perhaps in Denver or on Long Island?
  • tpetpe Member Posts: 2,342
    I live in Southern Maryland. It's a fairly rural area. DC is about 60 miles away and Baltimore about 90. In the last year I've only driven over 200 miles in a day twice. That was a golf trip to Myrtle Beach. In this case, if I drove an EV, I would have had to endure a lengthy re-charge time or rent another vehicle. IMO, that would have represented a rare and acceptable inconvenience. For trips any longer than this I have come across a not so new invention called an airplane. There are 3 airports within 90 miles of where I live.

    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.
  • terry92270terry92270 Member Posts: 1,247
    "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. :cry: Once in Reno, it, like all of the West, it is spread out. A typical driving day, with shopping thrown in, even for those living in Reno, can easily involve 100 miles! For me, if I need to visit Home Depot, it is a 140 mile round-trip, plus an additional twenty miles of running around.

    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. ;)
  • midnightcowboymidnightcowboy Member Posts: 1,978
    There are currently 168,000 gas stations in the USA. The USA has a size of 3,537,441 square miles.

    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
  • tpetpe Member Posts: 2,342
    Where do you get these numbers from? You state that the average distance to a gas station is no more than 3.23 miles but then say that if we spaced charging stations out at 200 mile increments it would exceed the number of gas stations. I'm clearly not the math whiz you seem to be but something doesn't sound right here.
  • terry92270terry92270 Member Posts: 1,247
    "There are currently 168,000 gas stations in the USA. The USA has a size of 3,537,441 square miles.

    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. ;)
  • tpetpe Member Posts: 2,342
    Thanks for the help.

    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.
  • terry92270terry92270 Member Posts: 1,247
    Well,I agree. But as I posted elsewhere, the various rules, insurance liability regulations, local zoning and the like will be a huge burden in establishing re-charging stations. It isn't, unfortunately, a matter of just using a plug. Someone gets electrocuted, it's a matter of liability. Some areas require any kind of "service station" to have clean and spotless restrooms, and all that.

    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. :cry:
  • tpetpe Member Posts: 2,342
    I guess I don't see the great danger in re-charging a car's battery. I mean a person could spill gasoline on himself while filling up his car and then set himself on fire when lighting a cigarette. If a person's stupid enough no technology is 100% safe. My guess is that more people die in car fires than will ever die as a result of EV technology.

    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.
  • terry92270terry92270 Member Posts: 1,247
    It isn't a matter of what you or I think. Or what anyone thinks except the probability people with insurance companies, who bring misery to every business and person they impact upon. ;)
  • dhanleydhanley Member Posts: 1,531
    " Assuming a square this is 4.58 miles per side anbd worst case distance is 1 /square root of 2 or 3.23 miles. "

    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.
  • elkeinelkein Member Posts: 19
    Ah hem!
    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.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    While I question this 52 billion dollar cost for building charging stations

    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.
  • dhanleydhanley Member Posts: 1,531
    The enthusiast situation is a 2 car household:

    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.
  • tpetpe Member Posts: 2,342
    Future EVs will probably outperform the bmw and porsche. That's just the nature of electric motors.

    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.
  • midnightcowboymidnightcowboy Member Posts: 1,978
    Actually the BMW 335i is a small car with only 12 cuft. Not enough for a very long trip for most people. The Boxster is even worse and a much harsher ride with only 10 cuft.

    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
  • midnightcowboymidnightcowboy Member Posts: 1,978
    TPE,

    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
  • rorrrorr Member Posts: 3,630
    I thought that 42 million mile figure looked a teeensy bit high.... :surprise:

    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..... :blush:
  • terry92270terry92270 Member Posts: 1,247
    A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon we'll be talking about real money. :P
  • tpetpe Member Posts: 2,342
    I'm not sure where this $5M per charging station figure is coming from. California installed 356 chargers at 111 sites for a cost of $1.6M. Now these were only level II chargers (220 volts, 60 amps)that require 4-6 hours to deliver a full charge. Level III chargers (440 volts, 400 amps) that can deliver 50 kWh of electricity in 15 minutes cost more but not that much. If these charging stations are installed at rests areas than the basic facility already exists. The $5M per charging station just doesn't make sense.
  • midnightcowboymidnightcowboy Member Posts: 1,978
    i think you were taking about the KOA camper slot station which had chargers to warm the engine blocks.

    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
  • terry92270terry92270 Member Posts: 1,247
    Many KOA's now have 50 or 100 AMP hookups. ;)
  • timothyftimothyf Member Posts: 40
    How about a developing a plug in with Mini QED technology? Shrink down VW's existing TDI diesel and use it as a replacement for the ICE doing the recharging in the Mini, as well. This way no one's beholden to an electric outlet when you're on the road, but the option remains for overnight recharging. Further for those of us in Northern climates, the car's heater could be set on a timer so that everything's nice and toasty in the morning from power off the grid rather than the car's battery. Cost could be an issue, but you won't have the cost or weight of a transmission and the engine would be much smaller as well.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    FedEx together with Eaton and Freightliner developped hybrid delivery trucks and had been running 18 prototypes. More recently a further 75 vans were built to go into service in New York City and other cities by this summer.

    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
  • tpetpe Member Posts: 2,342
    With the current state of Li-ion batteries, cycle life could be the achilles heel of this plug-in route. The Tesla Roadster has a distance of 250 miles per charge. Their website states that this battery pack should last for 500 full cycles, which would be 125,000 miles. They give a more conservative estimate of 100,000 miles. For a plug-in that only provides a range of 30 miles it's battery pack will pretty much be completely cycled every day. Meaning that in less than 2 years it will have exceeded the typical 500 cycle life expectancy of Li-ion batteries. Some of these plug-in hybrid prototypes have now been on the road for over a year. It will be interesting to see if they are developing battery pack issues.

    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.
  • michael2003michael2003 Member Posts: 144
    I was also concerned over the number of times that a smaller battery pack would need to be recharged. For a limited electric only range, I think that using supercaps might be a better alternative. This way there should be no concern over the number of times that recharging occurs. Would you be aware of why this might not be more feasible? Do they perhaps not have the power density necessary to feed sufficient power to a motor?
  • tpetpe Member Posts: 2,342
    Super capacitors have the potential to be the best energy storage device for EVs. The unlimited number of times that they can be charged is very attractive because even if the initial cost is high you would be talking about something that would never wear out. So amortized over enough years they would be cheap. Their power density (discharge rate) is not the problem. Its the low energy density (storage) that needs to be overcome before they are a viable replacement for batteries. A company called EEStore claims to have solved this problem but because they have yet to publicly demonstrate this capability I believe this to be more fiction than fact. Promising research is currently going on at MIT but the scientists there estimate that this technology is still 10 years away from being commercial. Regardless, the future looks good.
  • michael2003michael2003 Member Posts: 144
    I know they won't be able to support an EV, but shouldn't the existing supercaps already have the energy density to support the short range needed for serial hybrids? I would think so and am wondering why I'm not hearing that anyone is actually considering it, which is making me think that there must be a reason why not.
  • terry92270terry92270 Member Posts: 1,247
    Expense.
  • michael2003michael2003 Member Posts: 144
    Would anyone be aware of any cost comparisons between super/ultra caps and batteries. I would be surprised if there was such a significant difference. After all, with batteries, we would have to add the battery replacement cost into the overall Cost of Ownership but with super/ultra caps, we would not.
  • terry92270terry92270 Member Posts: 1,247
    Why is that :confuse:
  • goodcrdgoodcrd Member Posts: 253
    Capacitors or more commonly used Capacitor banks have been used in electric propulsion systems for years. I worked on one system which was designed in the late 1970's which used a solid state chopper controlled two phase traction motor which got it's power from overhead wires. The Caps supplied the extra power needed to accelerate the vehicle. If the capacitors failed the power draw from the system would blow the overhead. This system worked well. The vehicles stayed in service for 22 years. In a hybrid systems using small diesel or gas engines I would mimic the GM locomotive. I would get rid of the mechanical transmission and us a chopper system to control the electric motors. The engine would solely be used to generate electrical and auxiliary power. This type of drive system would lessen the need for batteries and would greatly improve energy conservation and useage.
  • terry92270terry92270 Member Posts: 1,247
    That seems to be almost like the Fuel Cell technology, which several major manufacturers have announced they are speeding up development on.....
  • goodcrdgoodcrd Member Posts: 253
    Yes. But the Hydrogen infustructure and fuel cell technology at present are not cost effective and practical. I would love to be wrong. Right now it's how we can use the most efficient and cost effective power source to power these systems. We are just eliminating loses, to make more efficient use of our fuel source. At present hydrocarbon based fuels, hopefully later Hydrogen.
  • terry92270terry92270 Member Posts: 1,247
    If you check back a page, I think you will see GM or Toyota announced they were going to begin production of Fuel Cell cars next year, or 2008. ;)
This discussion has been closed.