Posted on 02/07/2008 7:22:51 AM PST by decimon
Hybrid electric vehicles not as green as they are painted
Hybrid electric vehicles that run on both conventional gasoline and stored electricity can be no more than a stop gap until more sustainable technology is developed, according to researchers in France. Writing in the Inderscience publication International Journal of Automotive Technology and Management, they suggest that the adoption of HEVs might even slow development of more sustainable fuel-cell powered electric vehicles.
Jean-Jacques Chanaron Research Director within the French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS) and Chief Scientific Advisor at the Grenoble School of Management and Julius Teske at Grenoble, question strongly whether the current acceptance of hybrid vehicle technology particularly in the USA is in any way environmentally sustainable.
The researchers have analyzed the spread of this technology including the non-financial drivers for its adoption. They point out that most manufacturers are rapidly integrating hybrid electric vehicles into their technology portfolio, despite the absence of significant profitability.
They add that the misinformed craze for hybrid vehicles especially in the USA, and increasingly in Japan and Europe, and potentially in China, could represent a red light for more innovative technologies, such as viable fuel-cell cars that can use sustainably sourced fuels, such as hydrogen. They concur with earlier studies that suggest that hydrogen fuel cells will not be marketable in high volumes before at least 2025. This could, however, be too late for some models of climate change and emissions reduction. They also point out that even fuel cell technology has its drawbacks and much of the marketing surrounding its potential has emerged only from the hydrogen lobby itself.
"There is a general convergence of strategies towards promoting hybrid vehicles as the mid-term solution to very low-emission and high-mileage vehicles," the researchers assert, "this is largely due to Toyota’s strategy of learning the technology, while building up its own ‘quasi-standard’, thanks to its high-quality and reliability reputation and its high market share on the North American market." They add that, "Such a convergence is based more on customer perception triggered by very clever marketing and communication campaigns than on pure rationale scientific arguments and may result in the need for any manufacturer operating in the USA to have a hybrid electric vehicle in its model range in order to survive."
Moreover, political pressures also play a significant part. The three major US manufacturers - GM, Ford, and Chrysler - recently urged President Bush to financially and politically support a national technological solution for hybrids; this was independent of the currently dominant solutions initiated by Toyota. The researchers concede that, "The quest for low emission, clean, and high-mileage vehicles is on its way and should be at the top of the manufacturers' agenda," they say. However, they suggest that the technology, marketing, and public perception leads to one overriding problem: Is a hybrid strategy sustainable in the long run? Chanaron and Teske think not.
The complexity and high cost of the hybrid technology is also playing against itself," they say, "There is a huge strategic dilemma for the key players of the automotive industry where a mistake in technology decision-making might turn even a big player into a take-over candidate. The next five years will provide industry observers with more accurate trends and success or failure factors."
However, I agree that the technology is complex and we did opt for an extended warranty that I normally would not consider. She has also noted considerably decreased mileage when temperatures go below freezing.
Hydrogen power and fuel cell technologies are decades away from being practical. Hybrid technology may be a stop gap, but it is here and it works.
This is what happens when politics drives industry. In China and in the Soviet Union for over half a century technological decisions were made by politicians rather than reason. It created disaster after disaster.
My aunt’s husband bought a hybrid strictly for financial reasons, because he owns lots of rental properties an racks up 35,000+ miles per year driving between them.
Another FReeper reported good mileage spring & fall, but worse in winter, when heat is needed, and in summer, when the A/C is running.
Where does this magical sustainable hydrogen come from? The vast majority of hydrogen production now comes from processing natural gas which is not "sustainable". Most other methods of hydrogen production rely on electricity, and you have to ask whether a sustainable electric source (solar, hydroelectric, nuclear, wind, tidal, etc.) would be better used in the nation's electric grid instead of producing hydrogen for distribution.
Has any car been produced with a heat pump instead of separate AC and heat? Most heating now is done with waste heat from the engine, but with an electric car it seems like it would be more efficient to have a heat pump instead of resistive electric heating.
I'm pro-hybrid in the sense of hoping the technology becomes increasingly viable. If some of the new battery technology we read of becomes commercial reality then hybrid cars could become what breaks the viscous stranglehold of petroleum dependency.
Frankly, I've seen the hydrogen tech, and I'm not sure its not just pie in the sky. There is always a chance for discovering something new, but I just don't see it happening without many new breakthrough's. It's like solar, it works, but it will most likely never be practical until the efficiency is improved. Getting an engine to burn hydrogen is not hard. Producing enough hydrogen at a competitive cost is the hard part. In the mean time, fuel from all sources should be explored. I'm more in favor of hydraulic hybrids than electric hybrids anyway. No batteries to wear out and replace, and more power with simplicity an added bonus.
For the time being you are right but five years from now is anyone's guess.
I am still looking for a hydrogen mine. Maybe it will be near the electricity mine.
Seriously, hydrogen and electricity are very similar. They are carriers of energy, not sources. They are not “found” in nature in any useable form or quantity. They are both produced by using other sources of energy.
The only reason hybrid get reasonable mileage in the city is because they brake electrically, storing your kinetic energy to start back up again. That is the only reason the overall mileage is not worse than a “standard car” because of the massive weight of the batteries they are constantly dragging.
Here’s a scary thought. What if the oil companies have figured out how to use all their money to influence the car builders to go slow. Naw. Never happen. Doesn’t make sense that it would.
Where did I leave my sarcasm tag? I always misplace that thing.
You need to go RFID.
What is the towing capacity for the Mariner?
You’re assuming that the author means sustainable energy at current demand rather than at current availabilty. The hard core eco-freaks don’t care if the great majority of humanity is disconnected, immobile, alone and in the dark. In fact, this is the goal.
The author’s arguement is not against battery electric hybrids necessarily. It is against any efficiency improvement which extends the period of fossil fuel usage.
I am a skeptic of the current implementation of hybrid technology, not of the concept. Any method of recovering braking energy, and of disconnecting engine load from road load will improve gross efficiency.
Forget hybrids as we know them.
The Future:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn3380-denim-solar-panels-to-clothe-future-buildings.html
http://www.energy.gov/news/4503.htm
http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/MSD-full-spectrum-solar-cell.html
And for cars in particular...: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/01/0114_050114_solarplastic.html
It's just a matter of how to make energy portable and use it efficiently. Even a coal or natural gas power plant is more efficient than a car engine.
It might be more efficient, but remember that the AC is a heat pump already.
When I can compare cost per mile using real cars with real, readily available technology, then we can make a fair comparison.
Until then, its just dreaming.
I get 27 mpg in my 95 Volvo wagon on the highway. 30 mpg is not much better to justify the loss of power. My old car just keeps running and running, like the energizer rabbit. I’d like a new car, but I just can’t justify it, when nothing is wrong with the one that I’ve got.
From what I understand about hybrids, their strength is not in being hybrid, or being electric. Their strength is their ability to recharge batteries from braking energy that is scrubbed off as heat in normal cars. That is, take the deceleration recharge away from a hybrid and you have no advantage whatsoever, and maybe even a disadvantage due to the weight of the battery.
My point is that if you are not doing a lot of stop and go driving, and doing a lot of freeway driving, a hybrid really brings little, if anything, to the table.
Then again, if your friend is putting those 35k miles on in urban/suburban driving it is probably saving a lot!
When I lived in Montana, a coworker had a Prius and it flat out wouldn't run when the temp was 10 or more below.
Except: Fire flies... They are part of Nature...glow worms, certain eels, etc....they power up...
>>They are not “found” in nature in any useable form or quantity.<<
Are you implying I cannot connect the lightning rod on my barn in Kansas to my 12 volt battery in my car to get a good charge? ;)
>>What is the towing capacity for the Mariner?<<
I believe the manual sez something about a medium sized Radio Flyer.
I recommend the book Energy Victory.
The only time I really need maximum power is when I am climbing a short entrance ramp near work and have to get into traffic. If the ramp was the length it should be I would never push my engine to near its max. You pay a mileage penalty for having a large engine you only need thirty seconds a day.
I completely agree except for the one “real advantage” I mentioned in post 21.
The “thing” that is good is not that they are hybrid. It is that they recover braking energy. But companies have been experimenting with that using hydraulics or capacitors instead of batteries.
>> I had been a hybrid skeptic until my wife recently purchased a hybrid Mercury Mariner.
We’ll need to see how these machines fair 3-5 years down the road. There’s also the economics of disposal and repairs. Will the fuel savings out-weigh the life-cycle costs of the new components?
I noticed the other day a car backing into a parking spot. For a moment, I thought the car was coasting into position without combustion when I then realized it was a hybrid probably running under electric power.
I read an article about a hybrid made strictly for performance. It had something like a 200 hp gas engine and a 150 hp high torque electric connected to a large capacitor.
350 horses off the line. I wonder how it would do in a Miata?
I'm not saying hybrids make sense; just that fuel cells ain't the answer.
Go turbodiesel!
I'm also amused by the lengths that people go to, to convince themselves that buying a hybrid was The Right Thing To Do. For instance, one of my relatives drives a Prius and raves about the gas milage he gets in it. 99% of the driving he does is interstate-based, so the Hybrid piece has little to do with it....it's the fact that the car has a hamster wheel for a motor.
Coworker plunked down a ton of extra money for a Honda Hybrid of some sort. He just took a trip in it and was bragging about the fantastic mileage he got - 31mpg.
My Ford gets around 22-24 mpg, and it cost $7000 less than his car. He'll need to drive a whole lot of miles before he catches up to me, dollar-wise. But, environmentally-smug-wise, he's waaaaaay ahead. So I guess that's good for him.
I've recently been looking at diesel trucks. The problem is, I can get a gas model for about $20k less. Given that diesel is about 40 cents higher on average per gallon, I just don't get it. Diesel has lost it's advantage over the life of the truck.
Yeah, the new buzz is about "Plug-In Cars". Power grids are already stretched to the breaking point, but the fools promoting this technology just assume that power is *there* when they plug something in.
IMHO, the same people promoting plug in cars are the ones that would scream NIMBY!!!! if the local power co. decided to put in a new plant. That's just my opinion, though.
Everything is a trade off. People that think they get something for nothing endlessly amuse me.
Honda is a bad example. They (unwisely in my opinion) designed their hybrids for more power rather than more mileage which is what the market wants.
New boilers have improved dramatically, but remained simple and energy was indeed saved as efficiency improved.
The best way to save energy in a vehicle is to make it completely electric and charged via plug in to the power grid that has efficiencies built in already. This way you have the best of the two factors in efficiency and energy is saved. To put it all in the car, only increases the upfront costs and maintenance. Plus, you have to carry the additional mass.
That's the way I see it.
Electricity must be used to split water to produce the hydrogen.
The advantage of hydrogen over electricity, for now, is that combustion produces the acceleration we have become accustomed to.
The three major US manufacturers - GM, Ford, and Chrysler - recently urged President Bush to financially and politically support a national technological solution for hybrids; this was independent of the currently dominant solutions initiated by Toyota.
A car used mostly for highway driving will get no benefit from being hybrid. Also, don't look for aircraft to ever become hybrid due to weight. It would be interesting if a system could be developed to take the kinetic energy of planes coming in for landings and convert it into electricity. Also, I wonder if an electrmagentic rail launch system that will be built into the next generation of aircraft carries could be scaled up to accelerate aircraft down runways to get enough velocity to get into the air. Aircraft can use up to 20% of their entire fuel load just getting off the runway.
So far we have only seen the first generation of hybrids. I'm sure batteries will improve, engines will be switched to bio-diesel, vehicles will be optimized for their tasks and we will see much better numbers. All the more gas will be left for my Harley.
A Harley is a machine for converting gasoline to sound. Some of the excess sound can be used to move the Harley to another location. :-)
Add to that a solar cell “coating” that charges the battery while it is parked in the sunbaked parking lot while you are at work. Now that we are getting 30% to 40% efficiency in solar cell technology and a myriad of ways to apply it (even in the form of a plastic paint), this could get very interesting 10-50 years from now.
we’ll still have congestion, but the air will be cleaner...
I really like my 2008 Camry Hybrid. While it’s advertised as 34/33, I get about 36 out of it, and have gotten over 40 on a 2.5 hour trip on basically flat roads. Should do even better in Spring-Fall as you get the gas mileage equivalent of a regular car until the engine warms up. I’m interested in how the Eco mode switch affects the AC this Summer.
Cool stuff
The future lies in the sea:
“MagPower moves alt-energy into China
Delta-based company nabs $22 million fuel-cell deal
Joanne Lee-Young , Vancouver Sun
Published: Monday, October 31, 2005
Basically, a magnesium anode is placed in saltwater. This leads to an electro-chemical reaction involving oxygen that produces energy. Key to the process is MagPower’s patented hydrogen inhibitor, which actually suppresses the production of hydrogen, allowing additional energy to be conserved and captured.
http://www.magpowersystems.com/
If anything, I think that proves my marketing point.
Please note - I think that hybrids are a good "intrim" technology. I also can see uses for them....cabs, delivery trucks, the previous poster who does 35K miles of city driving for his job. They make total sense for these people.
But for the average Joe - like my coworker - who puts 10-15K miles on his car a year - it'll take a long time to recoup the initial cost.
It has been a while since I studied fuel cells, but I believe that they DON’T burn hydrogen; they operate by stripping the electron from the proton (in a hydrogen atom) and forcing the electron through an anode to an electric circuit for power and the proton to the cathode where it reacts with air (oxygen) and the electron to form water (the only byproduct). And, while I believe that there are other oxidizing agents, most current research and designs use oxygen.
IOW it is an electric motor, not an ICE, and operates like the same technology which supplied both power and water to Apollo astronauts. Thus, you see how old the technology is. The main problems as I understand it are cost of manufacturing the fuel cells and power capability, which both make it less attractive to the much cheaper current ICE and hybrids. (or ethanol fuels, which are also clean burning - unless you think that Co2 is a dangerous greenhouse gas)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.